Methods and Systems for Improving the Reliability of Orthogonally Redundant Sensors

ABSTRACT

Methods and systems for sensor calibration and sensor glucose (SG) fusion are used advantageously to improve the accuracy and reliability of orthogonally redundant glucose sensor devices, which may include optical and electrochemical glucose sensors. Calibration for both sensors may be achieved via fixed-offset and/or dynamic regression methodologies, depending, e.g., on sensor stability and Isig-Ratio pair correlation. For SG fusion, respective integrity checks may be performed for SG values from the optical and electrochemical sensors, and the SG values calibrated if the integrity checks are passed. Integrity checks may include checking for sensitivity loss, noise, and drift. If the integrity checks are failed, in-line sensor mapping between the electrochemical and optical sensors may be performed prior to calibration. The electrochemical and optical SG values may be weighted (as a function of the respective sensor&#39;s overall reliability index (RI)) and the weighted SGs combined to obtain a single, fused SG value.

RELATED APPLICATION DATA

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No.14/261,043, filed Apr. 24, 2014, now U.S. Pat. No. ______, which claimspriority from U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/916,632, filedDec. 16, 2013, all of which are incorporated herein by reference intheir entirety.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

Embodiments of the present invention relate generally to sensortechnology, including sensors used for sensing a variety ofphysiological parameters, e.g., glucose concentration. Moreparticularly, embodiments of the invention relate to orthogonallyredundant glucose sensors and sensor systems, including closed-loopinsulin-infusion systems, and to calibration and sensor glucose (SG)fusion methods and systems for improving the accuracy and reliability oforthogonally redundant glucose sensors, devices, and systems.

BACKGROUND

The pancreas of a normal healthy person produces and releases insulininto the blood stream in response to elevated blood plasma glucoselevels. Beta cells (β-cells), which reside in the pancreas, produce andsecrete the insulin into the blood stream, as it is needed. If β-cellsbecome incapacitated or die (Type I diabetes mellitus), or in somecases, if β-cells produce insufficient quantities of insulin (Type IIdiabetes), then insulin must be provided to the body from anothersource.

Traditionally, since insulin cannot be taken orally, insulin has beeninjected with a syringe. More recently, the use of infusion pump therapyhas been increasing, especially for delivering insulin for diabetics.For example, external infusion pumps are worn on a belt, in a pocket, orthe like, and deliver insulin into the body via an infusion tube with apercutaneous needle or a cannula placed in the subcutaneous tissue.Physicians have recognized that continuous infusion provides greatercontrol of a diabetic's condition, and are increasingly prescribing itfor patients.

Infusion pump devices and systems are relatively well-known in themedical arts for use in delivering or dispensing a prescribedmedication, such as insulin, to a patient. In one form, such devicescomprise a relatively compact pump housing adapted to receive a syringeor reservoir carrying a prescribed medication for administration to thepatient through infusion tubing and an associated catheter or infusionset. Programmable controls can operate the infusion pump continuously orat periodic intervals to obtain a closely controlled and accuratedelivery of the medication over an extended period of time. Suchinfusion pumps are used to administer insulin and other medications,with exemplary pump constructions being shown and described in U.S. Pat.Nos. 4,562,751; 4,678,408; 4,685,903; 5,080,653; and 5,097,122, whichare incorporated by reference herein.

There is a baseline insulin need for each body which, in diabeticindividuals, may generally be maintained by administration of a basalamount of insulin to the patient on a continual, or continuous, basisusing infusion pumps. However, when additional glucose (i.e., beyond thebasal level) appears in a diabetic individual's body, such as, forexample, when the individual consumes a meal, the amount and timing ofthe insulin to be administered must be determined so as to adequatelyaccount for the additional glucose while, at the same time, avoidinginfusion of too much insulin. Typically, a bolus amount of insulin isadministered to compensate for meals (i.e., meal bolus). It is commonfor diabetics to determine the amount of insulin that they may need tocover an anticipated meal based on carbohydrate content of the meal.

Over the years, a variety of electrochemical glucose sensors have beendeveloped for use in obtaining an indication of blood glucose levels ina diabetic patient. Such readings are useful in monitoring and/oradjusting a treatment regimen which typically includes the regularadministration of insulin to the patient. Generally, small and flexibleelectrochemical sensors can be used to obtain periodic readings over anextended period of time. In one form, flexible subcutaneous sensors areconstructed in accordance with thin film mask techniques. Typical thinfilm sensors are described in commonly assigned U.S. Pat. Nos.5,390,671; 5,391,250; 5,482,473; and 5,586,553 which are incorporated byreference herein. See also U.S. Pat. No. 5,299,571.

These electrochemical sensors have been applied in a telemeteredcharacteristic monitor system. As described, e.g., in commonly-assignedU.S. Pat. No. 6,809,653, the entire contents of which are incorporatedherein by reference, the telemetered system includes a remotely locateddata receiving device, a sensor for producing signals indicative of acharacteristic of a user, and a transmitter device for processingsignals received from the sensor and for wirelessly transmitting theprocessed signals to the remotely located data receiving device. Thedata receiving device may be a characteristic monitor, a data receiverthat provides data to another device, an RF programmer, a medicationdelivery device (such as an infusion pump), or the like.

Regardless of whether the data receiving device (e.g., a glucosemonitor), the transmitter device, and the sensor (e.g., a glucosesensor) communicate wirelessly or via an electrical wire connection, acharacteristic monitoring system of the type described above is ofpractical use only after it has been calibrated based on the uniquecharacteristics of the individual user. Accordingly, the user isrequired to externally calibrate the sensor. More specifically, adiabetic patient is required to utilize a finger-stick blood glucosemeter reading an average of two-four times per day for the duration thatthe characteristic monitor system is used. Each time, blood is drawnfrom the user's finger and analyzed by the blood glucose meter toprovide a real-time blood sugar level for the user. The user then inputsthis data into the glucose monitor as the user's current blood sugarlevel which is used to calibrate the glucose monitoring system.

Such external calibrations, however, are disadvantageous for variousreasons. For example, blood glucose meters include inherent margins oferror and only provide discrete readings at one point in time per use.Moreover, even if completely accurate, blood glucose meters arecumbersome to use (e.g., one should not operate an automobile and take afinger stick meter reading at the same time) and are also susceptible toimproper use. Furthermore, there is a cost, not to mention pain anddiscomfort, associated with each application of the finger stick. Thus,finger stick replacement remains a goal for the next generation ofglucose monitoring systems.

As sensor technology improves, there is greater desire to use the sensorvalues to control the infusion of insulin in a closed-loop system (i.e.,an artificial pancreas system). Specifically, a closed-loop system fordiabetes includes a glucose sensor and an insulin infusion pump attachedto the patient, wherein the delivery of insulin is automaticallyadministered by the controller of the infusion pump—rather than by theuser/patient—based on the sensor's glucose value readings. The benefitsof a closed-loop system are several-fold, including tighter glycemiccontrol during the night when the majority of hypoglycemic events occur.

An accurate and reliable sensor has long been identified as a necessityfor closed-loop realization. Glucose sensor technology has been evolvingin an effort to meet the accuracy required for fingerstick replacementand the reliability needed for consistent closed-loop functionality.Several types of technology are available, with two of the most commonand developed being electrochemical sensing, as noted above, and opticalsensing. See FIGS. 46A and 46B.

To offer improved performance, the possibility of redundant electrodeshas been explored and shown to provide a benefit. For example, previousstudies in the literature have reported using two implanted glucoseelectrodes to simultaneously monitor glucose levels in rat tissuecombined with a signal processing algorithm. These studies demonstratedthat the overall glucose measurement accuracy could be improved overthat of a single sensor. However, while it may provide for improvedaccuracy, such simple redundancy may not provide the reliabilitynecessary for closed-loop applications.

Since the closed-loop system replaces the patient as the decision-makingelement, a reliable system must typically deliver reliable data and haveerror detecting functionality, enabling the closed-loop system to takeaction on erroneous data. Such data may be caused by drift, noise, ortemporary or permanent malfunction of the sensor, often due to theimplanted environment's effect on sensors. Actions may vary from simplyprompting the patient to calibrate the system to terminating the sensorand requesting insertion of a new sensor. With identical sensorconfigurations, the redundant elements are similarly affected byenvironmental conditions and therefore could simultaneously presenterroneous data.

Thus, although recent advances in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)technology have offered several benefits for easier and more effectiveglycemic control in diabetes management, further improvements such asimproved sensor accuracy and reliability, reduced number of bloodglucose calibrations, improved specificity, and improved comfort duringsensor insertion and wear are still desirable.

SUMMARY

According to an embodiment of the invention, a method of calibrating anorthogonally redundant sensor device for determining the concentrationof glucose in the body of a user, where the sensor device includes atleast an electrochemical glucose sensor and an optical glucose sensor,comprises receiving a first signal from the electrochemical glucosesensor; receiving a second signal from the optical glucose sensor;performing a respective integrity check on each of the first and secondsignals; determining whether the first signal can be calibrated, andwhether the second signal can be calibrated, wherein the determinationis made based on whether the first signal and the second signal pass orfail their respective integrity checks; if it is determined that thefirst signal can be calibrated, calibrating the first signal to generatean electrochemical sensor glucose (SG) value; if it is determined thatthe second signal can be calibrated, calibrating the second signal togenerate an optical sensor glucose (SG) value; and fusing theelectrochemical SG value and the optical SG value to obtain a single,fused sensor glucose value for the orthogonally redundant sensor device.

In a related aspect, a continuous glucose monitoring system is disclosedthat comprises an orthogonally redundant glucose sensor device having anoptical glucose sensor and an electrochemical glucose sensor; and atransmitter operatively coupled to the electrochemical and opticalglucose sensors and having a housing, wherein the transmitter includessensor electronics in said housing, including at least one physicalmicroprocessor that is configured to receive a first signal from theelectrochemical glucose sensor and a second signal from the opticalglucose sensor; perform a respective integrity check on each of thefirst and second signals; determine whether the first signal can becalibrated, and whether the second signal can be calibrated, wherein thedetermination is made based on whether the first signal and the secondsignal pass or fail their respective integrity checks; if it isdetermined that the first signal can be calibrated, calibrate the firstsignal to generate an electrochemical sensor glucose (SG) value; if itis determined that the second signal can be calibrated, calibrate thesecond signal to generate an optical sensor glucose (SG) value; and fusethe electrochemical SG value and the optical SG value to calculate asingle, fused sensor glucose value for the orthogonally redundantglucose sensor device.

In a further related aspect, a program code storage device comprises acomputer-readable medium and non-transitory computer-readable programcode, stored on the computer-readable medium, the computer-readableprogram code having instructions, which when executed cause amicroprocessor to receive a first signal from an electrochemical glucosesensor and a second signal from an optical glucose sensor of anorthogonally redundant glucose sensor device for determining theconcentration of glucose in the body of a user; perform a respectiveintegrity check on each of the first and second signals; determinewhether the first signal can be calibrated, and whether the secondsignal can be calibrated, wherein the determination is made based onwhether the first signal and the second signal pass or fail theirrespective integrity checks; if it is determined that the first signalcan be calibrated, calibrate the first signal to generate anelectrochemical sensor glucose (SG) value; if it is determined that thesecond signal can be calibrated, calibrate the second signal to generatean optical sensor glucose (SG) value; and fuse the electrochemical SGvalue and the optical SG value to calculate a single, fused sensorglucose value for the orthogonally redundant glucose sensor device.

In all of the above embodiments of the invention, if it is determinedthat the first signal has failed its integrity check, then it isdetermined whether the second signal passes its integrity check and, ifthe second signal passes its integrity check, the second signal is usedto correct the first signal via in-line sensor mapping to generate acorrected first signal. The corrected first signal is then calibrated togenerate the electrochemical SG value. Similarly, if it is determinedthat the second signal has failed its integrity check, then it isdetermined whether the first signal passes its integrity check and, ifthe first signal passes its integrity check, the first signal is used tocorrect the second signal via in-line sensor mapping to generate acorrected second signal. The corrected second signal is then calibratedto generate the optical SG value. The electrochemical SG value and theoptical SG value are then fused to calculate a single, fused sensorglucose value for the orthogonally redundant glucose sensor device.

In accordance with another embodiment of the invention, a method isdisclosed for calibrating an optical glucose sensor of an orthogonallyredundant sensor device for determining the concentration of glucose inthe body of a user, wherein the sensor device further includes anelectrochemical glucose sensor, and the method comprises: receiving afirst signal from the electrochemical glucose sensor and a second signalfrom the optical glucose sensor, wherein the second signal is obtainedat a first point in time; receiving a meter glucose value, the meterglucose value being indicative of the user's blood glucose (BG) leveland being obtained at a second point in time; pairing the meter glucosevalue with the second signal if the second point in time is within aspecified amount of time before or after the first point in time;performing a validity check on the paired meter glucose value and secondsignal; if the meter glucose value is the first meter glucose value ofone or more meter glucose values, then calculating a mapped value forthe second signal based on the first signal; and calibrating the mappedvalue of the second signal based on the first meter glucose value.

In a related aspect, a continuous glucose monitoring system comprises anorthogonally redundant glucose sensor device having an optical glucosesensor and an electrochemical glucose sensor; and a transmitteroperatively coupled to the electrochemical and optical glucose sensorsand having a housing, wherein the transmitter includes sensorelectronics in the housing including at least one physicalmicroprocessor that is configured to: receive a first signal from theelectrochemical glucose sensor and a second signal from the opticalglucose sensor, wherein said second signal is obtained at a first pointin time; receive a meter glucose value, the meter glucose value beingindicative of the user's blood glucose (BG) level and being obtained ata second point in time; pair the meter glucose value with the secondsignal if said second point in time is within a specified amount of timebefore or after the first point in time; perform a validity check on thepaired meter glucose value and second signal; if the meter glucose valueis the first meter glucose value of one or more meter glucose values,then calculate a mapped value for the second signal based on the firstsignal; and calibrate the mapped value of the second signal based on thefirst meter glucose value.

In another related aspect, a program code storage device comprises acomputer-readable medium and non-transitory computer-readable programcode, stored on the computer-readable medium, the computer-readableprogram code having instructions, which when executed cause amicroprocessor to receive a first signal from an electrochemical glucosesensor and a second signal from an optical glucose sensor of anorthogonally redundant glucose sensor device, wherein the second signalis obtained at a first point in time; receive a meter glucose value, themeter glucose value being indicative of a user's blood glucose (BG)level and being obtained at a second point in time; pair the meterglucose value with the second signal if the second point in time iswithin a specified amount of time before or after the first point intime; perform a validity check on the paired meter glucose value andsecond signal; if the meter glucose value is the first meter glucosevalue of one or more meter glucose values, then calculate a mapped valuefor the second signal based on the first signal; and calibrate themapped value of the second signal based on the first meter glucosevalue.

According to another embodiment of the invention, a method ofcalculating a single, fused sensor glucose (SG) value based onrespective output signals of an electrochemical glucose sensor and anoptical glucose sensor of an orthogonally redundant glucose sensordevice comprises performing a status check on each of theelectrochemical glucose sensor and the optical glucose sensor;calculating a first reliability index for the output signal of theelectrochemical sensor; calculating a second reliability index for theoutput signal of the optical sensor; calibrating the output signal ofthe electrochemical sensor to obtain an electrochemical sensor glucosevalue (echem SG); calibrating the output signal of the optical sensor toobtain an optical sensor glucose value (optical SG); calculating a firstweight based on the first reliability index and calculating a weightedechem SG based on the first weight; calculating a second weight based onthe second reliability index and calculating a weighted optical SG basedon the second weight; and calculating the single, fused sensor glucosevalue based on the weighted echem SG and the weighted optical SG.

In a related aspect, a continuous glucose monitoring system is disclosedthat comprises an orthogonally redundant glucose sensor devicecomprising an optical glucose sensor and an electrochemical glucosesensor; and a transmitter operatively coupled to the electrochemical andoptical glucose sensors and having a housing, wherein the transmitterincludes sensor electronics in the housing, including at least onephysical microprocessor that is configured to perform a status check oneach of the electrochemical glucose sensor and the optical glucosesensor; calculate a first reliability index for an output signal of theelectrochemical sensor; calculate a second reliability index for anoutput signal of the optical sensor; calibrate the output signal of theelectrochemical sensor to obtain an electrochemical sensor glucose value(echem SG); calibrate the output signal of the optical sensor to obtainan optical sensor glucose value (optical SG); calculate a first weightbased on the first reliability index and generate a weighted echem SGbased on the first weight; calculate a second weight based on the secondreliability index and generate a weighted optical SG based on the secondweight; and calculate a single, fused sensor glucose value for theorthogonally redundant glucose sensor device based on the weighted echemSG and weighted optical SG.

In another related aspect, a program code storage device comprises acomputer-readable medium and non-transitory computer-readable programcode, stored on the computer-readable medium, the computer-readableprogram code having instructions, which when executed cause amicroprocessor to perform a status check on each of an electrochemicalglucose sensor and an optical glucose sensor of an orthogonallyredundant glucose sensor device; calculate a first reliability index foran output signal of the electrochemical sensor; calculate a secondreliability index for an output signal of the optical sensor; calibratethe output signal of the electrochemical sensor to obtain anelectrochemical sensor glucose value (echem SG); calibrate the outputsignal of the optical sensor to obtain an optical sensor glucose value(optical SG); calculate a first weight based on the first reliabilityindex and generate a weighted echem SG based on the first weight;calculate a second weight based on the second reliability index andgenerate a weighted optical SG based on the second weight; and calculatea single, fused sensor glucose value for the orthogonally redundantglucose sensor device based on the weighted echem SG and weightedoptical SG.

In accordance with yet another embodiment of the invention, a method ofcorrecting for a drift component of an output signal of a sensorcomprises measuring the output signal of the sensor over time to obtaina plurality of output signal measurements as a function of time, whereineach of the output signal measurements comprises a true output signalcomponent and said drift component as a function of time; calculating,as a function of time, an estimate of the drift component of theplurality of output signal measurements; and calculating an estimate ofthe true output signal component as a function of time based on theestimate of the drift component.

In a related aspect, a program code storage device comprises acomputer-readable medium and non-transitory computer-readable programcode, stored on the computer-readable medium, the computer-readableprogram code having instructions, which when executed cause amicroprocessor to measure an output signal of a sensor over time toobtain a plurality of output signal measurements as a function of time,wherein each of the output signal measurements comprises a true outputsignal component and a drift component as a function of time; calculate,as a function of time, an estimate of the drift component of theplurality of output signal measurements; and calculate an estimate ofthe true output signal component as a function of time based on theestimate of the drift component.

In aspects of the invention, the drift component may be estimated, andcorrected for, via mathematical modeling using either a moving-averageapproach or regression. In addition, the sensor may be a glucose sensor,such as, e.g., an optical sensor, where the measured output signal isthe optical ratio of the optical sensor. The optical sensor may be partof an orthogonally redundant sensor device which, in turn, may alsoinclude an electrochemical sensor.

The above features and aspects may also be operationalized inclosed-loop systems, with predictive diagnostics and minimalrequirements for external calibration.

Other features and advantages of the invention will become apparent fromthe following detailed description, taken in conjunction with theaccompanying drawings which illustrate, by way of example, variousfeatures of embodiments of the invention.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIGS. 1A and 1B show continuous glucose monitoring systems fororthogonally redundant sensing in accordance with embodiments of theinvention.

FIG. 2 shows a system-based approach to targeted electrochemical sensorimprovements.

FIGS. 3A-3C show a capsule-based optical sensor implanted under the skinin accordance with an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 4 shows a glucose binding competitive affinity fluorophore-labeledassay, including an internal reference, in accordance with embodimentsof the invention.

FIG. 5 shows an optical interrogating system for interrogating afluorophore-labeled assay with an internal reference used for intensitymeasurement in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 6A shows the various equilibria and the non-glucose consumingfeature of an optical glucose sensor in accordance with embodiments ofthe invention.

FIGS. 6B and 6C show, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention,the use of a reference fluorophore, as a diagnostic tool for an opticalsensor, indicating when, e.g., the integrity of the membrane may havebeen compromised or the optical connection may have been misaligned.

FIG. 7 shows a plurality of sensor electrodes distributed along thelength of an electrochemical sensor in accordance with an embodiment ofthe invention.

FIG. 8A shows, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention, a sideview of an optical fiber sensor containing an assay within a membranecoupled to the fiber's distal end, with excitation light entering, andfluorescence leaving, the fiber.

FIG. 8B shows the optical fiber glucose sensor of FIG. 8A, with thedetails of the assay shown, in accordance with an embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 9A is a sectional view of a transmitter having a dual connector forconnecting to both an electrochemical sensor and an optical sensor inaccordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 9B is a sectional view of a transmitter, with an opticalconnection, an electrical contact, and co-located deployment of anelectrochemical sensor and an optical sensor in accordance withembodiments of the invention.

FIG. 9C shows a sectional view of an integrated flex circuit inaccordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 10 is a side view of a needle for housing and simultaneouslydeploying both an electrochemical sensor and an optical sensor inaccordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 11 shows a graphical illustration of an error-check feature basedon a meter value obtained from a hand-held monitor with integrated meterin accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 12 shows theoretical response functions for an optical equilibriumglucose sensor and an electrochemical glucose sensor in connection withembodiments of the invention.

FIGS. 13A and 13B show algorithms for analyzing signals and performingdiagnostics to assess reliability of individual signals and assignweights through calibration in accordance with embodiments of theinvention.

FIG. 14 shows a two compartment model utilized in algorithms fortransforming sensor signals into blood glucose values in accordance withembodiments of the invention.

FIGS. 15A and 15B show an illustration of improving sensor accuracythrough assessing each individual sensor current with its reliabilityindex (a) and creating a weighted average (b) in accordance withembodiments of the invention.

FIG. 16 shows the overall architecture of a calibration and fusionalgorithm in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 17 shows, in accordance with embodiments of the invention, anillustrative example of the signal from a reference channel of anoptical sensor tracking the signal from an assay channel of the opticalsensor, thereby resulting in a clean ratio trace.

FIG. 18 shows and illustrative example of the impact of noise from thereference channel on the optical ratio.

FIG. 19 is a flowchart of in-line noise filtering methodologies inaccordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 20 is a flowchart illustration of a multi-channelsignal-to-noise-ratio (SNR)-based noise reduction methodology inaccordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 21A shows plots of the assay signal (ASY), the reference signal(REF), and the optical ratio (Ratio) based on an optical sensor's rawoutput signal.

FIG. 21B shows plots of the original optical ratio of FIG. 21A and ofthe noise-reduced optical ratio in accordance with embodiments of theinvention.

FIG. 22 shows an illustrative example of a noise metric calculationbased on the absolute second derivative of the optical sensor assaysignal in accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 23A shows illustrative plots of data for the optical assay,reference, and Ratio.

FIG. 23B shows a noise level evaluation curve derived based on the datapoints of FIG. 23A, in accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 24A shows the raw optical ratio signal measured in a diabetic dogprior to drift correction, as well as the estimated drift, calculated inaccordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 24B shows the drift-corrected optical ratio signal obtained byusing moving average and the drift-corrected optical ratio signalobtained by using linear regression in accordance with embodiments ofthe invention.

FIGS. 25A-25C show the effects of drift correction on the optical ratioin accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIGS. 26A and 26B show the use of electrochemical impedance spectroscopyin detecting a drop in low frequency Nyquist slope (a), which predicts adrift in sensor signal (b), in accordance with embodiments of theinvention.

FIG. 26C illustrates predictive diagnostics proactively identifyingsensor anomalies for improved reliability in accordance with embodimentsof the invention.

FIG. 27 shows different stages of in-line sensitivity loss detection byvisual inspection in accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 28 shows a sensitivity loss detection flowchart in accordance withan embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 29 shows an example of temporary sensitivity loss, or dip,detection using a combination of an electrochemical sensor output (Isig)and the variance of the rate of change of the Isig, in accordance withan embodiment of the invention.

FIGS. 30A-30D show failure mode detection results for temporarysensitivity loss in accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIGS. 31A and 31B show detection results for permanent sensitivity lossin accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 32 shows a comparison of calibrations frequency vs. time betweenexisting systems (a) and embodiments of the present invention (b).

FIG. 33 shows details of a fixed-offset calibration method in accordancewith embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 34 shows details of a dynamic regression calibration method inaccordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIGS. 35A and 35B show a flowchart for a dynamic regression algorithmfor optical sensor calibration in accordance with an embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 36 shows an illustrative graph of blood glucose (BG) values vs.Optical Ratio values that may be used to perform validity checks onBG-Optical Ratio pairs in accordance with an embodiment of theinvention.

FIGS. 37A and 37B show an example of using electrochemical sensorglucose values as calibration glucose points to enable dynamicregression for the optical glucose sensor in accordance with embodimentsof the invention.

FIG. 38 shows a flowchart for a 2-sensor glucose (SG) fusion algorithmin accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 39 shows an approximation of a log-normal distribution for CalRatio distribution used in calculating a Cal Ratio Reliability Index(RI_(cal)) in accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIGS. 40A-40C illustrate an example of SG fusion and the resultingreduction in MARD in accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 41 shows an optical system having discrete components (left), and astacked planar integrated optical system (right) in accordance withembodiments of the invention.

FIG. 42 shows illustrative layers of a wafer-scale stacked planarintegrated optical system (SPIOS) in accordance with embodiments of theinvention.

FIG. 43 illustrates the addition of key optical sensor electroniccomponents to an analog front-end for electrochemical sensing inaccordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIG. 44 shows wavelength ranges for three fluorophores which may be usedwith a laser diode source at 645 nm in accordance with embodiments ofthe invention.

FIG. 45 shows a care network using various components and methodologiesin accordance with embodiments of the invention.

FIGS. 46A and 46B show a table of existing glucose sensor technologies,benefits, and drawbacks.

FIG. 47 shows a table of responses to interferents and environmentalperturbations by electrochemical and optical sensors.

FIGS. 48A and 48B show a table of sources of sensor inaccuracy for bothoptical and electrochemical sensors, as well as the benefit of simpleand orthogonal redundancy on sensor performance.

FIG. 49 shows a table describing the role and contribution of eachsubsystem or component of a sensor system to sensor accuracy.

FIGS. 50A and 50B show a table describing the differences between MannanBinding Lectin (MBL) and other glucose binders employed forequilibrium-based glucose sensors.

FIG. 51 shows a table of individual accuracy effect on an orthogonallyredundant system, assuming true independence between the two sensingcomponents.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In the following description, reference is made to the accompanyingdrawings which form a part hereof and which illustrate severalembodiments of the present invention. It is understood that otherembodiments may be utilized and structural and operational changes maybe made without departing from the scope of the present invention.

The inventions herein are described below with reference to flowchartillustrations of methods, systems, devices, apparatus, and programmingand computer program products. It will be understood that each block ofthe flowchart illustrations, and combinations of blocks in the flowchartillustrations, can be implemented by programming instructions, includingcomputer program instructions. These computer program instructions maybe loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processingapparatus (such as a controller, microcontroller, or processor in asensor electronics device) to produce a machine, such that theinstructions which execute on the computer or other programmable dataprocessing apparatus create instructions for implementing the functionsspecified in the flowchart block or blocks. These computer programinstructions may also be stored in a computer-readable memory that candirect a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus tofunction in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored inthe computer-readable memory produce an article of manufacture includinginstructions which implement the function specified in the flowchartblock or blocks. The computer program instructions may also be loadedonto a computer or other programmable data processing apparatus to causea series of operational steps to be performed on the computer or otherprogrammable apparatus to produce a computer implemented process suchthat the instructions which execute on the computer or otherprogrammable apparatus provide steps for implementing the functionsspecified in the flowchart block or blocks. Programming instructions mayalso be stored in and/or implemented via electronic circuitry, includingintegrated circuits (ICs) and Application Specific Integrated Circuits(ASICs) used in conjunction with sensor devices, apparatuses, andsystems.

As shown in the drawings for purposes of illustration, embodiments ofthe invention are directed to sensors that may be introduced and/orlodged transdermally, or may be implanted in and/or throughsubcutaneous, dermal, sub-dermal, inter-peritoneal, or peritonealtissue. In the discussion herein, preferred embodiments of the devices,systems, and methods of the invention are described with reference toglucose as the analyte whose level/concentration in the blood and/orbodily fluids of the user is to be determined. However, this is by wayof illustration and not limitation, as the principles, devices, systems,and methods of the present invention may be used for sensing and/ordetermining the level of a variety of other physiological parameters,agents, characteristics, and/or compositions.

In light of the above-noted needs in continuous glucose monitoring,embodiments of the invention are directed to a more robust solution inthe form of an orthogonally redundant sensor (ORS) system. Orthogonalredundancy is defined as two devices employing two differenttechnologies to reach the same goal, where the failure modes of the twodevices are completely unique and do not intersect. This can be appliedto continuous glucose sensing through the use of unique glucosedetection schemes combined into a single body-worn device. Thedistinctive measurement technology, responses, and failure modes foreach sensor provide true redundancy to ensure reliable and safe glucosemeasurements regardless of the environmental response or sensoranomalies.

In an embodiment of the invention, the above-mentioned orthogonalredundancy may be created by combining the technologies of opticalsensing and electrochemical sensing to provide a unique solution tocombat the complexities of the implanted environment. The two (i.e.,optical and electrochemical) sensors are subject to different types ofinterferences, failure modes, and body responses, as described in FIG.47. With this in mind, the reliability of each sensor can be calculatedand weighted to provide the most robust and accurate glucose sensormeasurement. Thus, as shown in FIG. 47, the unique and distinctiveresponse to interferents and environmental perturbations by each of thesensors offers an enhanced ability to diagnose and filter environmentalresponse.

With reference to FIG. 47, it has further been found that theinterference profile of the optical sensor is very different from theinterference profile for the electrochemical (also referred to as“echem”) sensor. Thus, for all three of the primary electrochemicalinterfering substances—i.e., Acetaminophen, Uric Acid, and AscorbicAcid—a single fluorophore optical sensor has either no interference oran interference signal that is in the opposite direction to that of theelectrochemical sensor.

There are several sources of inaccuracies in glucose sensors. Theseinaccuracies may cause errors in sensor readings that can be correctedby a calibration, or they may be more serious errors from which thesensor cannot recover. The most common sources of error and the impacton the individual sensors are listed in FIGS. 48A and 48B.

It is known that acquiring signals from multiple electrochemical sensorscan provide improved performance in the form of simple redundancy,accomplished through either multiple electrodes on the same probe, or byutilizing spatial separation and two separate probes. For example,Medtronic, Inc. sells hospital glucose sensors that include two probes,with two working electrodes on each probe, resulting in four independentglucose signals.

Systems utilizing multiple electrochemical sensors are also beingdeveloped by Medtronic, Inc. However, these systems still do not providetrue redundancy through alternate sensing technologies with separate anddistinct failure modes. As an example, studies have shown that, as theelectrochemical sensor is pulled from the subcutaneous region into thedermal layers, the sensor signal goes to zero. In comparison, opticalsensors perform well in both the dermis and the subcutaneous region,which allows the optical sensor to maintain functionality even as thesensor is partially explanted, providing the patient with a measurementuntil the patient is able to replace the sensor. Simple redundancy withelectrochemical sensors would result in inaccurate data from bothsensors in the event of partial explanation. See FIGS. 48A and 48B.

In short, in order to achieve the reliability required of continuousglucose monitoring systems, including closed loop, orthogonal redundancyis necessary. With orthogonally redundant sensing, the advantages ofsimple redundancy are maintained, with the additional benefit of havingdifferent susceptibilities and interferers between optical andelectrochemical sensors. Thus, in certain embodiments, an orthogonallyredundant sensor may include an optical sensor and an electrochemicalsensor, wherein the latter may include up to, e.g., 5 independentsensing electrodes.

FIGS. 1A and 1B show components of a continuous glucose monitoringsystem for orthogonally redundant sensing in accordance with anembodiment of the invention. With reference to FIG. 49, in developingsensor systems, the role of the entire system on accuracy is considered,and a system-based approach to design is employed. Thus, as detailed inFIG. 49, each subsystem or component plays an integral role incontributing to the accuracy.

As will be described in more detail below, one goal of embodiments ofthe present invention is to continue to simultaneously improve bothperformance and usability. Thus, within each of the sub-systemsdescribed in FIG. 49, electrochemical sensor performance advancementshave focused on reduction of variation through targeted improvements.These targeted improvements are designed to improve day 1 performance,durability, and hypo- and hyper-glycemic performance and are detailed inFIG. 2. Targeted improvements drive the electrochemical sensor to apredictable sensitivity across sensors, glucose ranges and over time.The sensor anomalies that remain as outliers can be reduced throughpredictive sensor diagnostics, which proactively detect faults orfailures and recalibrate or shut down the sensor before it results ininaccurate glucose measurements.

It is understood that, for a given sensor or sensing system, the lowerthe Mean Absolute Relative Difference/Deviation (MARD) value, the higherthe accuracy of the sensor or sensing system. As noted in FIG. 2, thesystem-based approach (to targeted sensor improvements) reduces the MARDvalue for an electrochemical sensor from about 16% to about 9%, andpreferably less. For example, with respect to the transmitter 10, MARDis reduced by 0.5% by improving responsiveness and reducing lag time(reference numeral 11). Similarly, with regard to the design of theelectrochemical sensor 200, MARD is reduced by an additional 0.5% byeffecting a distributed-electrode design in order to reduce localeffects (reference numeral 201).

With the above in mind, embodiments of the present invention aredirected to an orthogonally redundant glucose sensor that includes anoptical based sensor and a non-optical sensor. Thus, within the contextof the present invention, in an orthogonally redundant glucose sensor,the above-mentioned electrochemical (i.e., non-optical) glucose sensormay be complemented with an optical based glucose sensor. In oneembodiment shown in FIGS. 3A-3C, the optical sensor may be a sensorcapsule 80 that is inserted under the skin 81 in the dermal layer, witha reader device 82 positioned above the skin. Light is transmittedbetween the reader device 82 and sensor 80 through the dermal layer inorder to excite the sensing element under the skin, and the resultantfluorescence is measured in the reader device. FIG. 3C shows therelative size of an exemplary optical sensor capsule 80.

In an alternative embodiment, shown in FIGS. 4 and 5, the optical sensormay be implemented by employing a transcutaneous optical fiber. Here,the fiber serves as a light guide with the sensing element attached tothe distal tip of the fiber. The fiber extends through the skin where itis aligned with the reader device. Light is transmitted between thereader device and the sensing element through the optical fiber.

In one embodiment, the sensing element includes a glucose bindingcompetitive affinity assay surrounded by a glucose-permeable membrane,allowing the glucose within the assay to equilibrate with the glucosepresent in the surrounding tissue. The assay, in turn, includes aglucose analog (e.g., dextran) and a glucose receptor (e.g., MannanBinding Lectin (“MBL”)) which is fluorophore-labeled to impartfluorescence. The equilibrium between MBL bound to glucose and dextran,respectively, determines the fluorescence intensity in response toillumination of the assay. A non-glucose sensing macromolecule labeledwith another fluorophore serves as an internal reference (i.e., areference fluorophore), wherein the latter emits its own fluorescence inresponse to illumination. The ratio of the assay-fluorescence andreference-fluorescence intensities is converted into a glucoseconcentration.

An optical glucose sensor having an assay compartment may be formed,e.g., by including a glucose permeable membrane containing the assay atthe distal end of an optical fiber. The optical fiber may then beinserted transdermally into the user's body, thereby situating the assaycompartment in the user's tissue, while leaving at least a part of theoptical fiber outside the body such that it can be accessed by (i.e.,optically coupled to, or aligned with) an interrogating system.Alternatively, the optical sensor may be implantable, e.g., as part ofan implantable glucose monitor including an interrogating optoelectronicsystem and a power source. The assay compartment may be formed between aglucose permeable membrane and an optical interface to theoptoelectronic system. The glucose-permeable membrane may preferably bebiodegradable.

As noted above and shown in FIG. 4, an optical glucose sensor may bebased on a competitive glucose binding affinity assay including aglucose receptor (e.g., MBL) and glucose analog/ligand (e.g., 110 kDadextran) contained in an assay compartment. The binding between MBL andglucose-like molecules (e.g., dextran) is reversible. When no glucose ispresent, MBL and dextran will predominantly be bound together. Whenglucose is added to the assay, it will compete off a part of the dextranpopulation, such that the assay enters a new equilibrium state. Theequilibrium state at all times corresponds to the glucose concentration.In order to determine this equilibrium state, MBL is labeled with adonor fluorophore (e.g., Alexa Fluor 594, or AF594), and the dextran islabeled with an acceptor dye (e.g., hexamethoxy crystalviolet-1(HMCV1)—a proprietary crystal violet derivative manufactured byMedtronic, Inc.). The donor fluorophore and the acceptor dye togetherform a Førster Resonance Energy Transfer (FRET) pair—i.e., the emissionspectrum of the fluorophore and the absorption spectrum of the dyeoverlap.

The occurrence of FRET affects the lifetime of the excited state and theintensity of the emitted fluorescence and can only occur when thefluorophore and the corresponding dye are in close proximity (i.e., inthe range of about 50 Å). Thus, the FRET mechanism permits interrogationof the equilibrium state optically by illuminating the assay andmeasuring either the lifetime of the excited state (“lifetimeinterrogation”), and/or the intensity of the emitted fluorescence fromthe donor fluorophore (intensity interrogation). In some embodiments,the latter approach is preferred, as it exposes the assay to 25 timesless light than with the lifetime interrogation.

The FRET mechanism offers several advantages. First, it workstransdermally, within an appropriate wavelength range, so thatinterference from the skin is minimized. Second, FRET fluorescencelifetime measurements are generally insensitive to the relative positionof the sensor and the reader unit as long as they are within opticalreach of each other, and are also insensitive to changes in theenvironment, which helps make the system virtually calibration free.Lastly, FRET it considered very sensitive if the appropriatedonor-acceptor ratio and suitable donor-acceptor geometry are obtained.

In selecting the FRET pair, the donor fluorophore and the acceptor dyeare preferably water soluble, as they are to function in an aqueousenvironment. In addition, since the sensor is implanted or resident inthe body, both FRET components should be non-toxic, as well as stable at37° C. for at least 2 weeks in the interstitial fluid (ISF). Moreover,fluorescence emission from the FRET pair should be in the red/far-redspectrum to minimize interference from substances in the skin and/ortissue auto-fluorescence.

Resistance to photo-bleaching, i.e., the photostability of both the dyesand the MBL and dextran, is also important. The photostability of theprotein originates from its resistance towards Radical Oxygen Species(ROS) generated by the excited dyes, and is an important feature in thestability of the assay. As will be discussed further hereinbelow, thisis also a reason why MBL is relatively more resistant to e-beamradiation (wet or dry) than other proteins.

Finally, the donor fluorophore and the acceptor dye must work with acoupling chemistry suitable for protein (preferably amine) conjugation.As discussed above, the MBL molecule may be labeled with a donorfluorophore via the ∈-amino group on lysine residues using N-hydroxysuccinimide (NETS) derivatives of the fluorophore, since this chemistrygenerates a very stable amide bond between the protein and thefluorophore, and works well in aqueous buffers at pH values that do notcompromise the protein.

From an optical point of view, a number of different fluorophores, suchas, e.g., Alexa Fluor fluorophores, Texas Red, and Cy5 may be used asfluorophores. However, it has been found that the Alexa Fluorfluorophores work best as they exhibit and/or facilitate severalpractical advantages, e.g., coupling chemistry, water solubility, photostability, and quantum yield. Alexa Fluor 594 (AF594), in particular,works well in the conjugation process with MBL; it is commerciallyavailable as an NETS derivative and, as such, is ready to be coupled tolysine residues on the MBL molecule.

The single MBL polypeptide has 19 lysine residues which are allpotential conjugation sites. The polypeptide organizes in triplexes,each having 3 carbohydrate recognition domains (CRD), that again formhigher complexes, usually with 9, 12, or 15 CRDs. It has been found thata degree of labeling (DOL) with AF594 of about 0.8-1 AF594/CRD givesoptimal dose-response, with dextran labeled with HMCV1 as ligand. A DOLvalue that is too high would lead to self-quenching, while a DOL valuethat is too low would compromise the signal magnitude. It should benoted that, when using NHS as conjugation chemistry, AF594 will be moreor less randomly coupled to the 19 lysine residues per polypeptidechain. This means that AF594 sitting on lysine residues in the collagenlike domain of MBL, distant to the CRD, may not participate in the FRET,unless the dextran molecule (size 110.000 Da), due to its linearconformation, is able to reach, with an HMCV1 dye, into the Førsterspace of such an AF594.

As noted, the ligand in the sensor is preferably dextran supplied withamino groups in order to be able to use NHS coupling chemistry forlabeling with the acceptor dye. For the latter acceptor dye, hexamethoxycrystalviolet-1 (HMCV1) is preferred over commercially-availableacceptor dyes because it is “non-fluorescent”—i.e., it has an absorptionspectrum overlapping AF594's emission spectrum, without overlappingAF594's absorption spectrum too much—and works with NHS, i.e., it has acarboxylic group. The above-mentioned non-fluorescence is important, asit helps reduce not only the amount of optical interference with thedonor emission, but also the amount of optics instrumentation that isrequired. In addition, HMCV1 is versatile, such that it can also be usedwith other fluorophores, e.g., AF647, which is discussed more fullybelow in connection with use of a red laser diode as a light source.

For certain embodiments, it has been found that approximately 5 HMCV1molecules per dextran molecule produce optimal dose-response, with thefluorophore-labeled glucose receptor MBL-AF594. Here, a DOL value thatis too low would result in inefficient quenching, which would compromisethe magnitude of dose-response, while a DOL value that is too high wouldcompromise excitation of AF594, since HMCV1 also absorbs at AF594'sexcitation wavelengths.

With reference to FIG. 6A, it is noted that there are actually threeseparate equilibria involved in the operation of the optical sensordescribed above. The first equilibrium is the one between glucose in theinterstitial fluid and glucose inside the sensor compartment, which isregulated by osmotic pressure, i.e., the difference in glucoseconcentration in the ISF and inside the sensor compartment. The secondequilibrium is the one between the glucose interacting with MBL and freeglucose, which is mainly regulated by the affinity between glucose andMBL. The third equilibrium is the one between MBL and dextran, which isregulated by the affinity between dextran and MBL and the concentrationof glucose inside the sensor compartment.

All three equilibria are dynamic and reversible. What this means is thatthe same glucose molecule may at one moment interact with a MBLmolecule, and in the next moment be non-interacting with MBL, and in athird moment cross the sensor membrane, leaving the sensor compartmentand entering into the ISF. The interaction between the assay chemistrycomponents (MBL-AF594 and dextran-HMCV1) reflects at any time theconcentration of glucose in the sensor compartment. Fouling of thesensor—which may potentially compromise the permeability of thesensor—may extend the response time to changes in glucose concentrationin the ISF, but does not interfere with the glucose measurement in thesensor. That is, the assay chemistry always measures the correct glucoseconcentration inside the sensor compartment. In short, fouling of thesensor has no influence on the equilibria inside the sensor. Moreover,all equilibria that involve glucose are fully reversible and, as such,glucose is not consumed in the measuring process.

In contrast with optical glucose sensors, electrochemical glucosesensors are glucose consuming enzyme kinetics based systems. Since thelatter reactions consume glucose, sensor response is dependent onglucose diffusion across the outer membrane of the sensor. This can bedescribed by the following mass transfer equation:

$\begin{matrix}{j = {{- D}\frac{dC}{dX}}} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} (1)}\end{matrix}$

where j is the glucose flux, D is the diffusion constant, C=[Glu], and Xis distance. Bio-fouling changes the thickness of the sensor membrane(dX), thus reducing the glucose flux and measured sensor response.Hence, a sensor re-calibration would be required.

However, since optical glucose sensor technology is not glucoseconsuming, i.e., it is based on reversible glucose binding to a glucosereceptor protein, as detailed above, sensor response depends on theconcentration of glucose inside the sensor (assay) compartment. Theglucose levels inside the compartment will always be in equilibrium withglucose levels outside the membrane regardless of the thickness of theouter membrane and/or bio-film, because glucose is not being consumed.This equilibrium system can be described by the following equation:

K=([MBL−Dex][Glu])/([MBL−Glu][Dex])  Eq. (2)

Since MBL and Dextran concentration is fixed inside the sensor, K isonly dependent on glucose concentration. Since bio-fouling occursoutside the membrane, the equilibrium of the reaction is not affected.Empirical data confirm the above-noted outcome.

Returning to FIG. 5, an optical system used to interrogate theabove-described sensing element (assay) is essentially a modifiedepi-fluorescence set-up with one light source to excite (i.e.,illuminate) the assay and two detectors to detect the fluorescenceemitted from the assay and the internal reference, respectively. Asnoted, the intensity of the emitted fluorescence correlates to theglucose concentration. Here, the measured intensity of the emittedfluorescence is affected by the intensity of the light source and thecoupling between the assay and the optical system. Therefore, theintensity measurement requires an internal reference fluorophore to beincorporated into the assay.

The reference fluorophore must differ from the assay fluorophore in away that the emitted fluorescence from the assay and that from thereference may be separated from one another, e.g., by having differentabsorption spectra or emission spectra. The reference fluorophore maybe, e.g., Alexa Fluor 700 (AF700) labeled onto Human Serum Albumin (HAS)or another macro molecule, which largely does not bind to the glucosereceptor. Alexa Fluor 700 may be excited simultaneously with the AlexaFluor 594 as their absorption spectra spectrally overlap. The emissionspectrum from Alexa Fluor 700 is slightly red shifted with respect toAlexa Fluor 594, which makes it possible to detect their respectivefluorescence emissions in separate wavelength regions.

The excitation, as well as the detection, of the emitted fluorescencefor the assay and the reference follow the same optical path from theoptical system to the assay. As such, the detected signal from thereference serves as a measure for the optical coupling between theoptical interrogating system and the assay. Any effect originating fromchanges in the optical coupling, such as alignment, may be cancelledout.

With reference to FIG. 5, a driver circuit 1310 modulates a LED 1320 ata low frequency—solely with the purpose of eliminating the 1/f noise andcanceling out ambient light—with a wavelength range capable ofsimultaneously exciting the assay and reference fluorophores. The LEDoutput is filtered using a multilayer dielectrical filter 1330 to selecta distinct wavelength region. The filtered LED output is reflected by afirst dichroic beam splitter 1340 and focused onto the sensor 1300,which includes the assay and the reference, by a lens 1350.

The assay and the reference emit fluorescence. The emitted fluorescence1301 and the reflected excitation light 1323 are picked up andcollimated by the lens 1350. The first dichroic beam splitter 1340transmits the fluorescence 1301. However, it reflects the majority ofthe back reflected excitation light 1323. A second beam splitter 1344reflects the reference fluorescence at a 90° angle 1307, but ittransmits the assay fluorescence 1309. A first emission filter 1360 witha distinct wavelength region red shifted with respect to, and notoverlapping, the pass band of the excitation filter and matching thedesired part of the assay fluorescence spectrum then blocks theremaining part of the excitation light and transmits the assayfluorescence.

Similarly, a second emission filter 1364 with a distinct wavelengthregion red shifted with respect to, and not overlapping, the pass bandof the excitation filter and matching the desired part of the referencefluorescence blocks the remaining part of the excitation light andtransmits the reference fluorescence 1307. Thus, in effect, only thefluorescence from the assay and the fluorescence from the reference arefocused onto their respective photo detectors 1380, 1384 usingrespective lenses 1370, 1374. The ratio between the detected assayfluorescence and the detected reference fluorescence correlates with theglucose concentration in the assay.

The above-described optical sensor technology offers several advantagesover other available technologies. For example, as noted previously, dueto the non-consuming and stable nature of the assay, the measurementtechnique is insensitive to bio-fouling. As such, it offers thepossibility of one single point calibration throughout the entirelifetime of the sensor. Furthermore, the assay contains a reference dye,which remains stable with changing glucose concentrations, but isaffected by many non-glucose induced changes. Therefore, it serves as asensor diagnostic tool for the optical sensor, indicating when theintegrity of the membrane has been compromised or the optical connectionis misaligned. See, e.g., FIGS. 6B and 6C. In addition, as will bedescribed further below, the assay may comprise a protectiveformulation, which is suitable for radiation sterilization, a commonsterilization technique for glucose sensors.

Moreover, the glucose receptor, MBL, is a human derived protein. Assuch, there is no immune response. Moreover, MBL may be derived fromplasma or produced recombinantly. In addition, compared to otherproteins that may be used for equilibrium-based glucose sensing, MBL hasproven biocompatibility and is used clinically for pharmaceuticalpurposes. FIGS. 50A and 50B show the known differences between MBL andother glucose binders employed for equilibrium-based glucose sensors.

Returning to the continuous glucose monitoring system for orthogonallyredundant sensing, the several elements/components shown in FIGS. 1A and1B will now be described in more detail.

The electrochemical sensor 200 is a state-of-the-art electrochemicalsensor, such as, e.g., Enlite3 (third generation Enlite sensor,Medtronic, Inc.). As shown in FIG. 7, the Enlite3 implanted sensorfeatures a distributed sensing electrode design, wherein the sensingelectrodes 210 are distributed along the length of the sensor to reducelocal tissue effects on sensor performance, as well as optimizedsolvent-free chemistry to improve consistency. In some embodiments, theelectrochemical sensor may consist of a flexible polyimide material withno plastic tubing.

As described previously, and shown in FIGS. 8A and 8B, the orthogonallyredundant sensor includes a fiber optical sensor 100. The fiber opticalsensor 100 has a fiber 110 with a glucose-permeable membrane 120attached at/proximate the fiber's distal end 115. The optical fiber 110may be made of plastic having tensile and fatigue properties that ensurerobustness. The glucose permeable-membrane 120 may, e.g., be heat sealedon the distal end 115 of the fiber. In embodiments of the invention, themembrane 120 may preferably be made of a biocompatible, biodegradablepolymer such as, e.g., PolyActive™ (Integra Orthobiologics, Irvine,Calif.).

The glucose permeable-membrane 120 houses the assay chemistry 125. Thesize of the optical fiber 110 is optimized so as to improve hydrationand response time, as well as to reduce the size of the implant andneedle that is used to introduce the fiber into the patient's body. Asis also shown in FIGS. 8A and 8B, excitation light 130 travels from theproximal end 117 of the fiber to the assay chemistry 125, and thefluorescence response 140 travels back up the fiber to an opticalinterrogating system that may be located, e.g., in the transmitter 10shown, e.g., in FIGS. 1A and 1B.

The transmitter 10 may include sensor electronics/instrumentation forthe optical sensor 100 and the electrochemical sensor 200. For theoptical sensor, such instrumentation may include, e.g., a light source,detector(s), optical drive electronics, and other elements/components ofan optical interrogation system (discrete or integrated). For theelectrochemical sensor, the instrumentation may include, e.g., apotentiostat and other related components (also discrete or integrated).As shown in FIGS. 9A and 9B, the transmitter 10 may also include a dualconnector 20 that allows the two sensor elements 100, 200 to separatelyconnect to the required instrumentation. Within the dual connection, theelectrochemical connection may allow for, e.g., up to four isolatedcontacts, and may be watertight. Similarly, the optical connection maybe watertight and/or provide for consistent index matching betweenoptical surfaces. Here, while direct contact may not be needed, thelight path must be clear.

In addition, the transmitter may house diagnostics, one or moremicroprocessors and/or digital signal processors (DSPs), memory, a RFcommunication chip (using, e.g., 2.4 GHz TelD protocol), and a batteryto support the measurement functionality of the sensors, the conversionof signals received from the sensors to glucose values, and wirelesscommunication, including transmission of the glucose values (or anaveraged, weighted, or otherwise modified version thereof) to, e.g., amonitor 300, an infusion pump 400, a display device, etc.

The transmitter 10 may also house the algorithms that utilize predictivediagnostics and signal comparison to assess signal reliability. Thealgorithms feature intelligent startup and calibration schemes so thatthe sensor performance dictates when calibrations are needed.Additionally, the algorithms operationalize the conversion of theindividual signals into a calculated glucose number, which iscommunicated to one or more of the devices noted above.

The transmitter 10 is a durable device and, as such, the associatedbattery may be rechargeable. In these embodiments, the transmitter mayrequire intermittent recharging of the contained battery. Therefore, inpreferred embodiments, a charger may be included for use in conjunctionwith the transmitter (battery). Additionally, the charger may test thetransmitter for proper functionality when required. It is noted that, insome embodiments, some or all of the elements/components that aredescribed herein as being housed in the transmitter 10 may be integratedin order to miniaturize the device. In this regard, a printed circuitboard assembly (PCBA) may be used. In some embodiments, at least some ofthe above-mentioned elements/components may be contained in the monitor300, the infusion pump 400, a display device, etc.

An insertion device 500 is used to implant the sensors 100, 200 in sucha way as to minimize trauma and maximize patient comfort and consistencyof sensor delivery. See FIG. 10. The insertion device relies on adisposable, automatically retracting needle 510 that is designed withthe sensor base to deliver the sensors 100, 200 through the user's skin.Specifically, the optical sensor 100 and the electrochemical sensor 200are co-located inside the needle and, as such, are insertedsimultaneously.

The electrochemical sensor 200 generally comprises a thin and wide flexsubstrate. As such, it may be located between the opening of the needle510 and the optical fiber sensor 100 to aid in retention. The diameterof the fiber sensor may be as large as about 500 μm, but is preferablyless than 200 μm. It is noted that, in FIG. 10, the needle 510 is shownat 0° (i.e., horizontally). However, in practice, the needle 510 isinserted at 90°.

As is clear from FIGS. 9A, 9B, and 10, the substrates for theelectrochemical sensor and the optical sensor may be fabricatedseparately and assembled individually into a single base of a singlesensor housing (e.g., the transmitter 10). The two sensors are theninserted within a single insertion device 500. However, although theinsertion device deploys both sensor substrates together, the substratesare not connected in the implant area.

The electrochemical sensor (probe) and the optical sensor (probe) may,nevertheless, be co-located in vivo. In this regard, it has beendiscovered that the performance of one of the sensors is not affected bythe presence of the other sensor within close proximity. For example,the presence of an optical sensor probe does not shadow or preventglucose from reaching the electrochemical sensor (probe). Similarly,peroxide, which is produced as a byproduct of the electrochemical sensorreaction with glucose, does not affect performance of the opticalsensor. Even at high concentrations of peroxide, such as 12 ppm (i.e.,equivalent to a 400 mg/dL glucose response for an electrochemicalsensor), peroxide has been found to have no effect on the optical sensorresponse.

FIG. 9C shows an alternative embodiment, where the substrates for theelectrochemical sensor and the optical sensor are integrated so as toform an integrated flex circuit.

The handheld monitor 300, which may also be referred to as “the On BodyController” or “the On Body Communicator” (OBC), may include anintegrated blood glucose meter 320 utilized for calibration. Algorithmswithin the handheld monitor 300 provide an error check to ensure thatinaccurate blood glucose readings are not communicated. Inclusion ofthis error check has the potential to decrease MARD—and, therefore,increase accuracy—significantly as an incorrect meter point used forcalibration can falsely raise or lower calculated glucose levels. See,e.g. FIG. 11.

Accuracy

In the continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system described above,orthogonal redundancy using two unique sensing technologies provides forincreased accuracy and reliability while enabling environmental effectsto be accounted for. Specifically, with respect to accuracy, embodimentsof the inventions described herein enable a MARD of about 13%. In thisregard, it is understood that existing blood glucose meters (i.e.,finger-stick) in-home use models are expected to have generally highaccuracy; that is, a MARD approximating 9%, with 95% of all pointsexpected to be accurate in terms of ISO 15197:2003. Under the latterstandard, a meter is deemed accurate if it meets the following criteriafor at least 95% of samples tested: (1) For blood glucose levels below75 mg/dL, the monitor reading must be within 15 mg/dL of the reference;and (2) for readings of 75 mg/dL or higher, the monitor reading must bewithin 20% of the reference reading.

For closed-loop ready sensing systems, meter equivalency is not anecessity. Here, the literature has suggested a much looser systemaccuracy requirement with a MARD of 15% (see, e.g., Hovorka R.,“Continuous glucose monitoring and closed-loop systems,” DiabeticMedicine 2005(23)). In fact, current-generation CGM systems havepublished accuracies meeting the 15% requirement, but are accompanied bya large reduction in percentage of samples considered accurate accordingto the ISO 15197 standard noted above. This deviation in system accuracymay be attributed to multiple factors (e.g., calibrating meterinaccuracy, sensor delay, etc.); however, it is noted that therequirement treats blood samples as independent, discrete events.Contextual (trending, historical) data provided by CGM systems shouldallow for a relaxation of what is deemed an “accurate” reading.

Reliability

Orthogonal redundancy also allows for a combined reliability that farexceeds the individual reliability of either sensing component.Specifically, as will be discussed further below, two orthogonal sensorswith an ISO accuracy of 75% would theoretically be accurate 93.75% ofthe time when combined. The redundancy increases both accuracy andpercent of time data is displayed.

A reliable system requires (1) data to be displayed as often as possiblewhile (2) only displaying data when it is accurate. It is noted that,with improvements to sensor technology and failure detection algorithms,the accuracy of sensor systems will improve significantly. However,failure detection algorithms that are too sensitive might reduce theamount of displayed data to an extent that is unacceptable to the user.In this respect, the reliability of the sensing platform describedherein may include the following two components: (1) data display (% oftime); and (2) accuracy (% of time).

An embodiment of the system described herein meets the followingreliability requirements for 94% of sensors: (1) It displays sensor data90% of sensor wear “calibrated” time; and (2) it meets ISO 15197:2003requirements on 93.75% of displayed sampled points. It is noted thatsome existing sensor technologies may currently meet the first criterionabove, but, with regard to the second requirement, significantimprovements would be needed in order to achieve near-meter equivalencyin terms of ISO 15197:2003.

Existing sensor technology has published accuracy roughly on the orderof 70%, meaning that 70% of all evaluated CGM points are deemed accurateaccording to the ISO 15197:2003 standard. Therefore, assuming twosensing components of roughly equivalent accuracy with randomdistributions of sensor error occurrence (i.e., assuming that bothsensing components will not always be reading inaccurate at the sametime), significant gains in accuracy may be realized provided that thesystem is able to quickly identify possible faults in one or the othersensing component.

Probabilistically, this may be shown as follows:

Let:

-   -   S1 be the set of all evaluation points for sensing component 1        (e.g., an optical sensor).    -   S2 be the set of all evaluation points for sensing component 2        (e.g., a non-optical sensor).    -   S1 and S2 be independent, normally distributed variables (due to        sensor orthogonality).

Then, the probability that for any sample in time either S1 or S2 willbe accurate is derived from the additive rule for non-mutually exclusiveevents:

P(a OR b)=P(a)+P(b)−P(a)×P(b)  Eq. (3)

Where

-   -   a, b represent whether a point in S1, S2 is accurate (as defined        by ISO 15197:2003); and    -   P(a), P(b) represent the probability that any such point is        considered to be accurate.

Using two sensors with P(a)=P(b)=0.7, P(a OR b)=0.7+0.7−(0.7×0.7)=0.91(i.e., accurate on 91% of points). Thus, any increase in accuracyperformance of either sensing component over this baseline increases theaccuracy of the overall system as well. FIG. 51 shows individualaccuracy effect on an orthogonally redundant system, assuming trueindependence between the two sensing components.

As noted, the expected combined accuracy is based on anticipatedimprovements in accuracy to one or both sensing components in order toachieve 93.75% accuracy without sacrificing usable sensor lifetime, andassuming complete independence. In a preferred embodiment of the presentinvention, where one of the two sensor components is an optical glucosesensor, and the non-optical sensor is an electrochemical glucose sensor,some of the factors that may influence complete independence of theoptical and electrochemical sensing technologies include, e.g., thefollowing: (1) sensor co-location within a single implant does notaccount for physiological effects (i.e., decreased interstitial fluidglucose concentration as a result of increased pressure on the insertionsite); and (2) simultaneous calibration of both sensing componentsrelies on an expectation of accuracy from the reference point (e.g.,meter finger-sticks) such that, if not correctly identified by thesystem, a sizeable error from the reference point may propagate intosensor glucose calculation, resulting in distortions of sensor accuracyfor both sensing components.

Hypoglycemia Performance

Combining the optical sensor and the electrochemical sensor yields asensing system with high precision both in the hypoglycemic and thehyperglycemic range due to the individual dose responses. FIG. 12 showsdose response functions (i.e., the correlation between sensor output andglucose dose) for an optical equilibrium glucose sensor and anelectrochemical glucose sensor. The optical sensor features a steeperslope 133 in the hypoglycemic region, leading to higher precision, whilethe electrochemical sensor has a linear slope 233, resulting in higherprecision in the hyperglycemic region.

The established accuracy standards for glucose monitoring devices allowfor higher percentage error in the hypoglycemic regions because theclinical treatment decision remains the same regardless of hypoglycemicseverity. In closed-loop systems, sensor performance in regions ofglycemic excursion (either hypo- or hyper-glycemic ranges) becomesincreasingly important, as such systems rely not only on excursionaccuracy, but also on contextual trending data as crucial feedback inputfor control algorithms.

Embodiments of the orthogonally redundant sensor described herein offerbenefits in terms of hypo- and hyper-glycemic performance. The twoglucose sensors have different dose response curves that may improvehypoglycemia and hyperglycemia performance. Equilibrium sensors' doseresponse function is not a linear function, but a curved shaped functionwith the steepest slope when approaching a glucose concentration of 0mg/dL. The steeper the slope in dose response, the higher the precisionof the sensor is. Therefore, the affinity-based glucose sensorsgenerally have better hypo sensitivity than hyper sensitivity as opposedto electrochemical sensors, where the dose response function is a linearfunction resulting in equivalent hypo and hyper sensitivity. Combiningthe optical sensor and the electrochemical sensor, therefore, yields asensing system with precision both in the hypo range and in the hyperrange.

As noted previously, Hovorka has suggested that, for closed-loopapplications, a MARD between 10-15% would be desirable with a preferencetoward underestimation rather than overestimation. Moreover, theClinical and Laboratory Standard institute (POCT05-P, “PerformanceMetrics for Continuous Glucose Monitoring; Proposed Guideline,” CLSI)has proposed definitions for home-use hypoglycemic sensitivity,specificity, and false alert rates (for continuous interstitial glucosemonitoring) as follows: (1) Sensitivity: for any meter reading below 70mg/dL, a sensitive CGM system shall also read 70 mg/dL or below within+/−30 minutes of the reference sample; (2) specificity: for anyeuglycemic meter reading (not hypo- or hyperglycemic), a CGM readingalso within this range is considered a true negative; and (3) falsealert: for any meter reading above 85 mg/dL, any CGM reading which atthat time reads at 70 mg/dL or below will be considered a false alert.The sensitivity/specificity metric allows for consideration of thecontextual data provided by the CGM system most relevant to closed-loopcontrol.

In embodiments described herein, the orthogonally redundant sensingsystem meets a hypoglycemic MARD of 13% with sensitivity and specificityof at least 95% and false alert occurrence rate below 10%. Theindependent accuracy of each sensor in the orthogonally redundant systemmeets this requirement in the majority of situations, especially giventhat orthogonal redundancy allows for elimination of signals that are onthe edge, further improving sensitivity/specificity and false alerts.

Reduced Warm Up

Embodiments of the orthogonally redundant sensing system describedherein also provide reductions in warm-up time through optimization ofindividual sensor warm-up time. The overall system start-up time, whichis defined as the time until sensor signal is stable enough forperforming the first calibration, may be reduced by utilizingpredictable run-in behavior and start-up diagnostics as inputs to thealgorithm to create an adaptive warm up. Reducing sensor start-up timeis important for accuracy and reliability of the system, as well as theuser's convenience, as it allows the patient to complete finger-stickcalibration soon after inserting the sensor.

With respect to minimization of the individual sensor start-up times,the chemistry layers for the electrochemical sensor may be optimized,and new initialization schemes may be employed in the orthogonallyredundant sensor. For the optical sensor, the hydration of the (assay)chemistry may be sped up, and the design may be optimized for amaximized surface area to volume ratio. Hygroscopic agent(s) orchemical(s)—such as, e.g., sugar, honey, and certain salts, whichattract and retain water molecules from the atmosphere—may also be addedto the assay.

One of the major obstacles to obtaining a fast startup time is to removeair from inside the optical fiber sensor. In this regard, it has beendiscovered that adding a combination of sugars, bicarbonate, and anenzyme to (the assay of) the sensor gets about 90% of the air out of thesensor within about 30 minutes. Further reduction of start-up time maybe possible by optimizing the proportional make-up of theabove-identified combination.

Similarly, it has been discovered that smaller-diameter optical fibersensors provide a reduction in run-in time. For example, replacement ofa 500 μm-diameter fiber with a 250 μm-diameter fiber has been shown toreduce run-in times from about 3-4 hours to about 2 hours.

In addition to optimizing the individual sensors, the combined operationof both sensors in one system may also facilitate faster start-up.Predictable run-in characteristics may be incorporated in the algorithm,which helps lower the perceived start-up time, thereby also reducing thenumber of finger-stick calibrations during this time. Also, as will bediscussed further below, intelligent algorithms could compensate for thestartup characteristics of each sensor element and any sensor anomaliesthrough a reliability index approach.

In fact, the initial profile of sensors is an important input toearly-life sensor diagnostic algorithms. The post-initialized behavioris evaluated by the system to (1) determine the times at which sensorswill be ready for initial calibration (adaptive warm up) and (2)identify sensors that are not adequately sensitive to glucosefluctuations (non-critical fault detection).

Advanced Algorithms

In embodiments of the invention, advanced algorithms combine reliabilityinformation from each sensor and exploit features of the orthogonallyredundant sensors to reduce lag, improve start-up time, and improveaccuracy. By comparing signals, faults can be confirmed andself-calibrations can be performed, thereby reducing the number ofglucose meter calibrations required.

As shown in FIG. 13A, in one embodiment, an algorithm may take thesignals and fault detection of each sensor into account, and thendetermine the reliability of each signal and weigh them appropriately.The algorithm may also take advantage of the specific benefits of eachsensor. For example, the optical sensor generally has a more stablesignal compared to the electrochemical sensor, which is known to have agradual change in sensitivity over time, requiring re-calibrations. WithElectrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy (EIS) measurements, or bycomparing large recent periods of the electrochemical sensor's signal,instances can be identified where the sensitivity of the electrochemicalsensor has changed. The optical sensor will then allow an immediateconfirmation of possible sensitivity changes and, if the signal isdeemed reliable enough, the electrochemical sensor can be re-calibratedbased on the optical sensor. This self-calibration feature reduces therequired number of external calibrations, which are typically necessaryto maintain high accuracy. In the optimal scenario, calibrations will beneeded to maintain confidence in the signal.

While the optical sensor is generally more stable, the electrochemicalsensor has other advantages. For example, during the first few hours ofstart-up, the electrochemical sensor is expected to reach a semi-stablepoint more quickly, but have a slight increase in sensitivity over thenext few hours. As previously described, predictable run-incharacteristics can be incorporated in the algorithm.

FIG. 13B shows an embodiment in which diagnostics may be used todetermine the reliability of individual signals, which signals are thenweighted accordingly. The individual weighted signals may then becombined and multiplied by a calibration factor to determine acalculated glucose value. As used herein, the terms “calibrationfactor”, “cal factor”, or “cal ratio” may refer to the ratio of bloodglucose (BG) to sensor signal. In embodiments of the invention, the“sensor signal” may be further adjusted by an offset value. Thus, forthe electrochemical sensor, e.g., the cal ratio may be equal to(BG)/(Isig−offset).

In another aspect, the algorithm may include a model for transformationof the sensor signal to match blood glucose concentration. See FIG. 14.This is done by a two-compartment model, which presumes the sensor is ina different compartment than the calibration measurements. The modelaccounts for the diffusion of glucose between blood, where calibrationmeasurements take place, and the interstitial fluid space, where thesensor is located. The model also accounts for glucose uptake by cells.

It is expected that the optical sensor may have a slightly longerresponse time than the electrochemical sensor. The advanced algorithmsherein can compensate for this lag by examining each signal's rate ofchange, and comparing the two signals. Depending on various factors, theelectrochemical sensor may detect changes more rapidly. The algorithmneeds to detect the change, and if it is unable to compensate for thechange, the system may weigh the electrochemical sensor more. Thus,while certain current sensors may perform better when calibrations aretaken during more stable periods, incorporation of the two compartmentmodel enables the use of calibrations taken at all times.

As noted previously and shown in FIG. 13A, a sensor in accordance withembodiments of the present invention may incorporate the benefits ofredundancy and sensor weighting using a reliability index. In anexemplary embodiment of the system, multiple electrochemical sensors areevaluated individually, and a reliability index is created for each. InFIG. 15, three sensors are sending data. Individually, each of thesesensors would result in an accuracy of about 8%. However, when combined,the accuracy improves to about 4.4%. Thus, sensor accuracy is improvedthrough assessing each individual sensor current with its reliabilityindex (FIG. 15A), and creating a weighted average (FIG. 15B). It isnoted that the inventive sensor, sensing system, and associatedalgorithms herein may be adapted for use at home and/or in a hospitalsetting.

FIG. 16 shows the overall architecture of a calibration and fusionalgorithm in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.Specifically, the algorithm starts with an electrochemical sensor signal(“echem Isig”) 2010 and an optical sensor signal 2020 as inputs onparallel tracks. At step 2012, 2022, an integrity check (to be discussedin detail hereinbelow) is performed for the respective signals.Generally speaking, each integrity check 2012, 2022 may include checkingfor sensitivity loss (which may be detected as a permanent downwardssignal drift), noise, and drift (including an upwards drift, whichusually occurs in optical sensors). The latter drift up may be detectedby, e.g., comparing the optical sensor glucose (SG) value to the echemSG (assuming the echem sensor is functioning properly), or bychecking/monitoring the past history of cal factors and determining thatthe (optical) sensor is drifting when the cal factor is significantlylower than the historical values.

With each integrity check, if the respective signal is found to bebehaving normally, i.e., if it exhibits an amount of noise, drift(either upwards or downwards), and/or instability that is withinacceptable limits 2015, 2025, then the signal is calibrated 2016, 2026.If, on the other hand, the signal from one of the redundant sensors(e.g., the echem sensor) exhibits a significant amount of noise, drift,and/or instability, an integrity check on that sensor's signal will fail2013. However, if the signal from the other sensor (e.g., the opticalsensor) is behaving normally, then the latter may be used to correct theunstable (echem) signal via in-line sensor mapping 2014. Similarly, ifthe optical sensor signal exhibits a significant amount of noise, drift,and/or instability, an integrity check on that sensor's signal will fail2023. However, if the echem Isig 2010 is behaving normally, then thelatter may be used to correct the optical sensor signal using in-linesensor mapping 2024. The mapped (i.e., corrected) signals 2017, 2027 arethen calibrated at 2016, 2026.

For the mapping steps 2014, 2024, the mapping parameters may bedetermined by regressing the optical sensor signal with the echem sensorsignal, and the echem sensor signal with the optical sensor signal, asfollows:

echem_signal_buffer_(n) =a×optical_signal_buffer_(n) +b  Eq. (4)

where “a” and “b” are the mapping parameters and may be determined byusing a least square method to minimize any error. Given the timedependence of the data, larger weights may be assigned to the latestdata following an exponential decay, where the data may be weighted witha weight of either “0” or “1”. In an embodiment of the invention, thebuffer sizes of the echem and optical signals in Eq. (4) may beinitially (i.e., during the start-up period) set at 3 hours, and thenextended to 6 hours once the sensors have been stabilized.

Referring back to FIG. 16, either the echem sensor signal 2015 or themapped (i.e., corrected) echem sensor signal 2017 is calibrated at step2016 to produce an echem sensor glucose (SG) value 2018. Similarly,either the optical sensor signal 2025 or the mapped (i.e., corrected)optical sensor signal 2027 is calibrated at 2026 to produce an opticalSG value 2028. Thus, for each echem sensor signal 2010, the algorithmwill generate a single calibrated SG value as indicated by 2018.Similarly, for each optical sensor signal 2020, the algorithm willgenerate a single calibrated SG value as indicated by 2028. Finally, afusion algorithm 2030 (to be described in further detail hereinbelow) isused to fuse the calibrated SG value from the echem sensor with thecalibrated SG value from the optical sensor to generate a single (final)SG value 2032.

As noted previously, in the inventive orthogonally redundant sensorsystem, the optical sensor generates both an assay-fluorescence (i.e.,assay signal) through an “assay channel”, and a reference-fluorescence(i.e., reference signal) through a “reference channel”. The ratio of theassay signal and reference signal intensities (i.e., the “opticalratio”) is then used in calculating a glucose concentration. In thisregard, the optical sensor signal 2020 is actually the ratio of theassay signal to the reference signal, which ratio is used as a singletrace for calibration purposes (to be discussed hereinbelow). Thereference channel, however, may also be used advantageously inmitigating noise introduced by optical component misalignment, LED poweradjustment, and other potential turbulence in the assay channel frommechanical noise sources.

FIG. 17 shows an example of how the signal from the reference channeltracks the signal from the assay channel, thereby resulting in a cleanratio trace. As can be seen from this diagram, the optical sensor outputshows two abrupt changes in the assay channel at around 4 hours afterinsertion (2041) and around 7 hours after insertion (2043). However,because there are similar and corresponding abrupt changes (2045, 2047)in the reference channel, any artifacts are cancelled out, therebyproviding a smooth ratio trace.

Nevertheless, there are instances where the reference signal can have anegative impact on the ratio by adding more noise into the ratio (i.e.,noise on top of the original noise carried in the assay channel). Ingeneral, the major component of noise from the reference channel issevere downwards signal drop, as shown, e.g., in FIG. 18. In the diagramof FIG. 18, no strong noise is present on the assay channel. However,the noise in the reference channel results in a ratio curve withmultiple upwards artifacts.

To address the above-mentioned noise, embodiments of the presentinvention utilize noise reduction methods that take advantage of thetwo-channel setup for the orthogonally-redundant sensor system, using atwo-stage noise filtering model to reduce the noise selectively (see2100 and 2200 in FIG. 19). For instances where the noise is too strongto be used for calibration and tracking glucose, a signal accelerationrate-based noise level estimation method may also be introduced, whoseoutput may subsequently be used as an input for system reliability andfailure mode assessment (see 2300 in FIG. 19).

The flowchart of FIG. 20 shows details of the multi-channelsignal-to-noise ratio (SNR)-based noise reduction process (2100) of FIG.19 in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. In general, duringthis stage of the process, the SNR of the calculated ratio and theoriginal assay channel are compared. The algorithm continues to use thesimple ratio (i.e., assay/reference) if it has less noise than the assaychannel, thereby indicating the reference channel's positive impact onthe system. On the other hand, once a SNR in the ratio is detected thatis higher than the SNR of the assay channel, an 80% weighted outlierfilter is applied to the reference channel in order to mitigate theeffect of any signal dips, etc. from the reference channel.

Specifically, the logic of the flow chart of FIG. 20 starts at step2105, where the current (data) packets from the assay channel (2110) andthe current (data) packets from the reference channel (2120) are used asinputs. At step 2130, a determination is made as to whether the currentassay channel packets and the current reference channel packets 2110,2120 are among the first 12 packets in the process. If it is determinedthat the current assay channel packets and the current reference channelpackets are, in fact, within the first 12 packets (2131), then thecurrent ratio is calculated as the ratio of the current assay channelpackets to the current reference channel packets (2150), and the resultis used as the output 2160 of the process.

If, on the other hand, it is determined that the current assay channelpackets and the current reference channel packets are not within thefirst 12 packets (2133), then the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of theassay channel is set equal to the SNR of the (most) recent 8 packets,including the current packet, from the assay channel (2134). Next, atstep 2138, the SNR of the ratio is calculated as the SNR of the ratio ofthe recent 8 packets (including the current packet) from the assaychannel to the recent 8 packets (including the current packet) from thereference channel. A determination is then made at step 2140 as towhether the SNR of the ratio (2138) is larger than the SNR of the assaychannel (2134).

At this point, if it is determined (2141) that the SNR of the ratio isnot larger than the SNR of the assay channel, the logic follows the pathof 2131, such that the current ratio is calculated as the ratio of thecurrent assay channel packets to the current reference channel packets(2150), and the result is used as the output 2160 of the process.However, if it is determined (2143) that the SNR of the ratio is largerthan the SNR of the assay channel, then an 80% weighted outlier filteris applied to the reference channel so as to mitigate the effect of anysignal fluctuations from the reference channel. Thus, at step 2144, thefiltered value of the reference channel packets (REF filtered) is takenas the 80^(th) percentile of the recent 8 packets, including the currentpacket, from the reference channel. Finally, the current ratio iscalculated as the ratio of current packets in the assay channel to REFfiltered (2148), and the result is used as the output 2160 of theprocess.

It is noted that, in embodiments of the invention, the SNR is calculatedas the reciprocal of the coefficient of variation, i.e., the ratio ofmean to standard deviation of the signal or measurement—in this case,assay channel and ratio measurement. However, different mathematicalcalculations can also be used with regards to different sensorconditions.

As shown in FIG. 19, the output 2160 from the first stage (2100) is nextfed into a 7^(th) order (i.e., 8 bit) Gaussian Smoothing FIR filter(2200) in order to further reduce the noise. FIGS. 21A and 21B show theresults of this filtration process on system performance during periodsof heavy system noise. In FIG. 21A, the raw assay signal (Asy) 2171, theraw reference signal (Ref) 2173, and the raw ratio signal 2175 areshown. FIG. 21B shows the noise-reduced optical ratio plotted over arange of ratios between 0.6 and 1.1. In this regard, the plot of FIG.21A is somewhat more compressed, as the data is plotted over a range ofratios between 0.4 and 1.6 (see right ordinate of FIG. 21A).

Returning to FIG. 21B, the original (raw) ratio 2175, the SNR check 2177in accordance with the procedure shown in FIG. 20, and the SNR check incombination with an 8 bit Gaussian filter 2179 are shown. As can beseen, the SNR-based method of the first stage of noise filtrationreduces most of the upward noise during the first half of the sensorlife while keeping the signal envelope complete. In the second stage,use of the Gaussian filter results in further reduction of the noiseoriginating mainly from the assay channel.

In general, high levels of noise suggest unsatisfactory workingcondition for a glucose sensor, irrespective of the source of the noise(e.g., external environment, internal biology environment, sensoritself, etc.). In certain extreme conditions, the ratio trace showslittle or no tracking of glucose when high levels of noise exist. Inthese situations, an in-line noise evaluation metric may be used inorder to determine whether a specific (current) sensor signal isreliable, such that further calculations based on the signal may beperformed.

Specifically, in signal acceleration based noise level evaluation 2300(see FIG. 19), a metric is calculated based on the absolute secondderivative (2183) of the assay signal 2181, as shown, e.g., in FIG. 22.For each assay packet with the previous 7 packets available, the metriccalculates the average acceleration rate of the previous 7 packets. Thecalculation is then repeated for 6 packets, 5 packets, 4 packets, and 3packets. Next, the maximum value among the results of the lattercalculations performed with each of 7, 6, 5, 4, and 3 packets isdetermined, and scaled by a factor, which may be determined fromempirical observations. In a preferred embodiment, the factor is 9000.The resultant scaled value is then clipped within 0 to 10. The samecalculation is then repeated for all assay packets.

A noise level evaluation curve derived in accordance with the aboveprocedure is shown in FIG. 23B, using the values of FIG. 23A as inputdata. As shown in FIG. 23B, two particularly noisy periods can beidentified: (1) between the 350^(th) and the 380^(th) packets; and (2)between the 1550^(th) and 1600^(th) packets. In this particular example,a noisy period has been defined as one in which the ratio noise level isgreater than, or equal to, 4. Depending on the specific sensor andapplication, a different threshold value may be used.

It is important to note that the noise evaluation curve can subsequentlybe used as a system reliability indicator in formulating a signalcompensation strategy, a sensor termination strategy, or both. In thisregard, the reliability index can be calculated, e.g., based simply onthe percentage of packets, or region under curve integration, for whichthe noise level is higher than a certain threshold. As mentionedpreviously, the threshold may be based on empirical observation orderived from user or system based sensor behavior characteristics.

Sensor Drift Detection and Correction

In one aspect, the orthogonally redundant system of the instantinvention increases confidence in drift detection by providing aninternal reference from which the system is able to verify suspecteddrifts and confirm sensor deviations without the need for action fromthe user.

Sensor drift is a characteristic of all sensing systems, and occurs overtime or in response to other environmental conditions such astemperature, bio-fouling, etc. Such improvements in sensor design as,e.g., thermal stabilizers, membrane changes, and electrode treatmentsmay be shown to reduce signal drift to levels on the order of 5-10% perday. While a relatively small drift represents an improvement overexisting sensors, system requirements for calibration frequency andaccuracy must allow the system to account for these deviations.

In embodiments, the inventive system and related algorithms hereinidentify cases of significant sensor drift (in both sensors), and eitheraccount for the detected drift or halt glucose display to the user untilthe potential fault is resolved, e.g., by calibration. In this way,drift detection is realized through signal analysis and is one parameterthat is fed into the system reliability index (see, e.g., FIG. 13A andFIG. 38).

Independently, the electrochemical and optical glucose sensing systemsare able to do some amount of self-diagnosis of sensor drift simply byevaluating periodic sensor behavior and how it changes over the courseof sensor life. As discussed previously, the non-glucose consumingnature of the optical sensor chemistry offers the benefit of beinginsensitive to bio-fouling. Since the glucose sensitivity is notdependent on diffusion rate across the membrane, sensor drift throughbio-fouling is generally not a concern.

In one aspect of embodiments of the invention, the drift component of asignal may be determined or estimated, and corrected for, viamathematical modeling using either a moving-average approach orregression. Specifically, a measured signal y(t) at discrete time t isknown to drift over time, so that it is composed of the true signal x(t)plus a drift component z(t).

y(t)=x(t)+z(t)  Eq. (5)

Using the following definitions, the aim is to identify z(t) from y(t),under the assumption that z(t) is a relatively smooth and slowly varyinglow order polynomial. The error between the estimated drift {circumflexover (z)}(t) and the real drift z(t) should be minimized so that x(t)can be reconstructed most accurately:

-   -   y(t)—measured signal (including drift) at time t.    -   z(t)—the real drift at time t.    -   {circumflex over (z)}(t)—an estimate of the drift z(t) at time        t.    -   x(t)—true signal (without drift) at time t.    -   {circumflex over (x)}(t)—an estimate of the original signal x(t)        at time t.

By obtaining an estimate {circumflex over (z)}(t) of the driftcomponent, the real signal can be reconstructed as:

{circumflex over (x)}(t)=y(t)−{circumflex over (z)}(t)  Eq. (6)

It is assumed that changes in z(t) occur over time, but that thesechanges are slow. Two methods of obtaining {circumflex over (z)}(t) arediscussed immediately below: moving average and regression.

Moving Average

Computing a moving average assumes that z(t) can be explained by itsaverage signal level—that is, high rates of drift will exhibit higheraverage signal magnitude than those with low rates of drift. A movingaverage is computed at each time t by sliding a window of observation oflength T₀ over time. That is,

$\begin{matrix}{{\hat{z}(t)} = {\frac{1}{T_{0}}{\sum\limits_{T = {t - T_{0}}}^{t}\; {y(T)}}}} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} (7)}\end{matrix}$

In Equation 7, configurable parameters include the length of the windowT₀, as well as the overlap between successive windows. The value of T₀should be made sufficiently large so as to average out fluctuations inx(t), but short enough to react to time-dependent changes in z(t). Inthe case of glucose sensing for monitoring diabetes, it may be assumedthat the drift is much slower than typical swings observed in diabeticblood glucose levels. For this application, values of T₀ may be, e.g.,about 0.5 days and larger, up to several days long.

The overlap between successive estimates of {circumflex over (z)}(t)determines how often the computation is made. Thus, there is a designtrade-off between computational expense, on the one hand, andmore-frequent tracking of changes in drift, on the other. In a glucosesensor, it is generally not expected that drift will changedramatically. As such, overlap in successive computation windows can bedecreased (e.g., up to 2 hours or more, depending on the level ofdrift). If computational expense is not an issue, then {circumflex over(z)}(t) can be computed at every available sample of (t).

In embodiments of the invention, depending on the specific application,it may be appropriate to modify the estimate of {circumflex over (z)}(t)by applying greater weight to some data than to others. For example,more-recent data may be more relevant to the estimate of drift thanolder data if, e.g., a sharper-than-normal or nonlinear change in driftoccurred at some point in the past. To account for this, the values ofy(t) within the computational window may be multiplied with anexponentially (or linear, or any other) decaying function of time, priorto computing {circumflex over (z)}(t).

As another example, some data may be more useful in estimating driftthan others if, e.g., there is a sensor malfunction and abnormally lowcurrents are being generated. This may be accounted for by applying,prior to estimating {circumflex over (z)}(t), a weighting function thatemphasizes currents within a normal range. The weights may be used togive greater importance to values within normal ranges, or to excludevalues outside a specific range altogether.

It is noted that the above-described weighting schemes are illustrative,and not restrictive, as other forms of weighting may be used, dependingon the specific sensor, environment, application, etc.

Regression

To estimate {circumflex over (z)}(t) using regression, a choice must bemade about the underlying model that best describes z(t). When a movingaverage is used, the assumption is, effectively, a single parametermodel—that is, that a single constant can describe the characteristicsof the drift during the window of observation. More complex models canbe assumed—for example, a linear relationship, where two parameters needto be estimated, or more complex higher-order polynomials where severalparameters must be estimated.

Regression is used to estimate the parameters that best fit the data.For a linear model, it is assumed that a relationship of the typez(t)=mt+c exists, and regression is used to estimate the values of m andc that minimize the difference between the measured z(t) and theestimated {circumflex over (z)}(t). Various standard algorithms existfor estimating optimal parameters of an assumed model (such as, e.g.,least mean squares or LMS, maximum likelihood estimation, and Bayesianlinear regression), as well as ensuring that the estimates are robust(e.g., robust LMS). Thus, for purposes of the ensuing discussion, it isassumed that robust estimates can be made when sufficient data isavailable.

Where, as here, there exists a measurement of y(t) rather than z(t), itis still possible to obtain the estimate {circumflex over (z)}(t), solong as the characteristics of z(t) and x(t) are separable. This canoccur, for example, when the frequency content of x(t) is much higherthan that of z(t); in other words, when changes in z(t) occur at muchlarger timescales than x(t). If frequency content is not sufficientlydistant from each other, then fluctuations in x(t) can affect theestimate {circumflex over (z)}(t). The level of crosstalk will depend onthe nature of the data under consideration.

To account for changes of z(t) over time, regression is applied over awindow of observation of length T₀, as was done previously for theexample using moving average methodology. The window is shifted in timeand a new regression is performed using this updated data. Here, theconfigurable parameters include the length of the window T₀, as well asthe overlap between successive windows. As with moving average, thevalue of T₀ should be made large enough to average out fluctuations inx(t), but short enough to react to time-dependent changes in z(t).Possible values of T₀ and overlap are the same as those discussed formoving average. In addition, weighting can also be applied in the sameway(s).

With the above in mind, an illustrative example is presented hereinusing the optical ratio of the orthogonally redundant sensor describedhereinabove, which sensor is known to exhibit drift over time. Forpurposes of the illustrative example, drift is assumed to be a linearfunction, and the regression is estimated using Robust Least MeanSquares methods. For both moving average and linear regression, theestimate of {circumflex over (z)}(t) started at t=0.5 days, and databefore t=0.2 days was excluded. The computation window length wasinitially T₀=0.3 days, and was allowed to grow up to T₀=1.5 days. Whenmore than 1.5 days of data became available (at t=0.2+1.5=1.7 days), thewindow was shifted in time with maximum overlap—that is, {circumflexover (z)}(t) was recomputed at every new available sample (in this case,every 5 minutes). No weighting function was used; that is, all valueswithin the computational window were given equal weight.

FIG. 24A shows the raw optical ratio signal 2301 measured in a diabeticdog prior to drift correction. Also shown in FIG. 24A is the identified(estimated) drift when both moving average (2303) and linear regression(2305) algorithms are applied to this data. FIG. 24B shows thedrift-corrected ratio for each of these methods. Moving average (2311)and linear regression (2313) both identify the upward drift, althoughmoving average appears to be more affected by swings in glucose.

To demonstrate efficacy, FIGS. 25A-C show the effects of driftcorrection on the signal. When drift is not present, the optical ratiois known to have an almost linear correlation to glucose changes.However, the presence of drift masks this relationship. This is shown inFIG. 25A, which plots independently-measured glucose samples takenthroughout the recording versus the optical ratio observed at the sametime. FIGS. 25B and 25C demonstrate that, by applying the driftcorrection, the linear correlation between glucose and ratio, which waslost because of the presence of drift, is restored. FIG. 25B employsdrift correction using moving average to compute ẑ(t), and FIG. 25Cemploys drift correction using linear regression to compute ẑ(t).

It is noted that, although the above example uses optical ratio, thismethod is applicable to any other signal that may be contaminated withslow time-varying drift.

Failure Detection

The state of the art in failure detection has been steadily movingtowards predictive diagnostics that are designed to proactively identifysensor issues before they affect the glucose reading. The orthogonallyredundant system of the present invention implements a three-tieredapproach to failure detection, i.e., failure detection solely with theelectrochemical electrode, solely with the optical sensor, and then withinformation from the combined signal.

With the electrochemical sensor, the most sophisticated failuredetection uses electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS). EIS offersa quick on-line method to diagnose the sensor and sensor membranestatus. An important advantage to EIS is that it can be done duringsensor operation, without turning the sensor off or changing theelectrode state. EIS is performed by passing a small AC voltage signalat a fixed frequency along with the sensor operating voltage (Vset). Thecurrent is measured and the impedance is calculated. This measurement isrepeated across a range of frequencies, and the impedance output is thenexamined to look for specific frequency dependent membranecharacteristics.

EIS can identify poorly performing sensors and instances where theelectrode has been partially pulled out of the tissue (and therefore isno longer sensing correctly). This is particularly useful as it can bedifficult for a patient to know when sensor pull-out occurs when wearingminiaturized components. More importantly, EIS may be used as apredictive diagnostic tool, alerting the system to issues before thesensor signal changes drastically.

In the example shown in FIGS. 26A and 26B, e.g., EIS detects a drop inlow frequency Nyquist slope (FIG. 26A), which predicts a drift in sensorsignal (sensor anomaly) shown in FIG. 26B. In FIG. 26C, electrochemicalsensors are periodically interrogated and analyzed using EIS, and theresponse is used to proactively identify potential faults or failures,such that the sensor may be recalibrated or shut down before it resultsin inaccurate glucose measurements. In short, such predictive diagnosisprovides the system the opportunity to mitigate the issue throughsuspended data or calibration request, thereby minimizing the effect(s)on the patient.

Other methods—not involving EIS measurements—for detecting signalanomalies include short periods where the calculated glucose would notbe correct, periods where the signal needs stronger filtering, orinstances where the sensor's glucose sensitivity has changed (in thiscase, require a new calibration).

For the optical sensors, the glucose value is calculated from the ratiobetween the assay signal and the reference signal, as detailedpreviously. These two signals are independently interrogated and areused to detect failures during use. Both the reference and the assaysignal must be within a certain interval (dynamic range), and if outsidethese intervals, the sensor's performance is not to be trusted.Additionally, if the rate of change exhibited by either the reference orthe assay signal is outside the given limits, then this behavior willcause a failure alarm. An example is detecting a misalignment betweenthe reader and the sensor. This will cause both signals to drop to avery low value in a very short period of time and hence cause an alarmbased on the signal gradient control function.

The orthogonally redundant system allows comparison of signals. Based onthe signal characteristics of each sensor, a reliability index iscreated for each signal. Comparing the reliability index of each sensorand the signals themselves allows confirmation of suspected faults, orprovides assurance for the algorithm that both signals are accurate. Forsituations when the reliability of the combined signal is under athreshold, a finger-stick confirmation may be necessary. In otherregions, the system could give a range of values, such as an expectedminimum glucose value to be used for bolusing purposes.Micro-environmental aspects, such as drugs or temperature changes, havethe potential to influence the system, but the optical sensor does notnecessarily respond in the same way as the electrochemical sensor. Forexample, electro-active species can cause an increased current in theelectrochemical sensor, but the optical sensor is not affected the sameway or possibly unaffected due to this.

Failure detection in the system of the instant invention is quiterobust, as a multi-sensor system has an added benefit of being able toconfirm failures. Orthogonally redundant sensors increase this benefit,since the optical sensor and electrochemical sensor have differentfailure modes and different responses to interfering compounds.

Returning to the electrochemical sensor, it is often challenging todetect certain failure modes of this sensor due to the lack of referenceinformation, as well as the serious consequences of false positive(failure) detection, i.e., incorrectly disregarding real hypoglycemic orhyperglycemic events. One such failure mode that is common toelectrochemical sensors and has a relatively large impact on sensoraccuracy is sensitivity loss—both temporary and permanent. In thisregard, the independent confirmation that is available via the opticalsensor of the inventive orthogonally redundant system provides anopportunity for various algorithms to include failure detection logicwith respect to the electrochemical sensor. Sensitivity-loss analysisand noise detection may be used in implementing such failure detectionlogic.

In-Line Sensitivity Loss Analysis

It is noted that, within the context of sensitivity loss analysis,temporary sensitivity loss events may be defined as those events thatare recovered, while permanent sensitivity loss events may be defined asthose that are non-recoverable. In embodiments of the invention,(electrochemical) sensor failure detection through sensitivity lossanalysis may be implemented by separating each sensitivity loss eventinto three stages: downhill, trough, and uphill, with the third stage(uphill) being optional.

As shown in FIG. 27 by way of illustration, the downhill stage 2403 maygenerally be defined as a period of time during which the signal (Isig)2401 from the electrochemical sensor tends to be low, and carries a highnegative rate of change. The downhill stage is followed by the troughstage 2405, which includes a period of time after the sensor hasremained in the downhill stage for a given amount of time, therebyconfirming that sensitivity loss has occurred. Depending on the specificsensor and environment, the sensor may stay in the trough stage 2405anywhere from several minutes to several hours. The last stage, uphill2407, generally covers a period of time in which the sensor signal showsa clear upwards trend and eventually passes beyond a (predetermined)threshold. As noted previously, in embodiments of the invention, theuphill stage may be an optional part of the failure-detection logic.

FIG. 28 shows a flow diagram for failure detection based on theabove-described logic. Specifically, a sensor signal starts at thenormal stage 2750, and then is continuously (or, in embodiments,periodically) monitored to determine whether it remains in the normalstage, or goes downhill (2752). If the signal is going downhill, then,after a predetermined period of time, the (data) packet is marked ashaving reached a first downhill point 2754. The signal then continues tobe monitored such that, if it is no longer going downhill 2756, thepacket (and, therefore, the sensor) is determined to have returned tothe normal stage 2750. If, on the other hand, the signal is determinedto still be going downhill (2758), then, after a predetermined period oftime, the (data) packet is marked as having reached a second downhillpoint 2760.

As shown in FIG. 28, the same logic continues, with lines 2762, 2768,2774, and 2780 leading back to the normal stage 2750, and each of thelines 2764, 2770, and 2776 leading to a next successive downhill marker.In this example, a determination is made that, if, after the 5^(th)marker 2778, the signal is still going downhill (2782), then the signalwill be considered to have reached the trough stage 2784. Once at thisstage, the monitoring continues, this time checking continuously (or, inembodiments, periodically) to determine whether the signal has startedan uphill trend. As long as an uphill trend is not detected (2786), thesignal is assumed to remain in the trough 2784. However, once an uphilltrend is detected (2788), the signal is monitored for a predeterminedperiod of time or interval, such that, at the end of the interval, ifthe signal is still trending uphill, it (and, therefore, the sensor) isdetermined to have returned to the normal stage 2750.

It is noted that, in an embodiment of the invention, once the signal ismarked with the first downhill marker 2754, the associated packet isdiscarded, and continues to remain unused until an uphill trend isdetected. In addition, the number of downhill markers to reach thetrough stage, as well as the signal monitoring intervals, may becustomized as required by, e.g., a specific sensor or a particularapplication. Moreover, downhill and uphill detection may be based, e.g.,on an Isig threshold, or a combination of an Isig threshold and an Isigrate-of-chance threshold. Thus, in embodiments of the invention, andwith reference to FIG. 27, the sensor signal may be considered to betrending downhill if the Isig (current) goes below, or is less than, alower threshold. In other embodiments, the sensor signal may beconsidered to be trending downhill if the Isig is less than a lowerthreshold, plus about 10 nA, and the Isig rate of change is less than,or equal to, about −0.1 nA/min. Similarly, in embodiments of theinvention, the sensor signal may be considered to be trending uphillonce the Isig exceeds a threshold (current), plus about 5 nA.

The above thresholds and offsets are based on empirical data for theelectrochemical sensor of the orthogonally redundant sensor system.Specifically, for the ORS sensor, it has been observed that Isig packetsbelow about 10-15 nA tend to display little to no sensitivity and, assuch, may not be useful for glucose tracking purposes. As a result, thethreshold may vary from 10 nA to 15 nA, depending on the sensor type, aswell as the tradeoff between percentage of sensor packet to display andsensor accuracy.

The above-mentioned (5 nA and 10 nA) offsets may also be tailored tospecific sensor performance. Examples, in this regard, include: (a) Thedistribution of all Isig values and cut off at the lowest 2˜5% Isigvalues; (b) Average Isig values when system accuracy indicator (MeanAbsolute Relative Difference) MARD exceeds a certain percentage; (c) Setfrom the combination of the sensor's historical data including Isigrange, accuracy, and sensor life time; (d) Set from the user'shistorical data; and (e) Set from the system's historical data.

Sensor Dip Detection

Temporary sensitivity loss—i.e., a sensor “dip”—can also be detectedusing a combination of the Isig and variance of the rate of change (ROC)of the Isig. In general, this method may be used advantageously when theIsig buffer size is equal to, or larger than, 2 hours. In oneembodiment, therefore, the logic proceeds by first creating an Isigbuffer of two hours. Next, the mean value and variance of the ROC of thebuffer are calculated. Then, every time the mean value is below a firstthreshold, and the ratio of the ROC variance between the current bufferand the buffer 2 hours ago is below a second threshold, a dip isconsidered to have started. The dip is considered to end when the meanvalue of the Isig buffer rises to an upper threshold. This is shownillustratively in FIG. 29, where the “previous sensor” 2803 and the“next sensor” 2805 are companion sensors on the same subject, and thedip starts when the dip indicator 2807 is equal to 5 (nA) and ends whenthe dip indicator 2807 is at 15 (nA).

Noise Detection for Electrochemical Sensor

A noise metric calculation, similar to that described for the opticalsensor and in connection with FIG. 22, may also be used for the raw Isigof the electrochemical sensor, with a different input and scalingfactor. Specifically, for echem noise calculation, both Isig (i.e., thesignal) and SG (i.e., the sensor glucose value) can be used as inputs.In either case, the Isig and/or the SG must be scaled. In an embodimentof the invention, the scaling factor may be empirically determined to be9. In addition, when the Isig is being used, the absolute secondderivative results also need to be multiplied by the current Cal Factorbefore scaling. A threshold value can then be calculated based on thedistribution of the noise value to determine if the packet can beconsidered as noisy. In embodiments of the invention, a typicalthreshold for noise detection can be, e.g., between 3 and 4. Thethreshold may also be determined based on empirical data, user specificdata, and sensor specific data.

FIGS. 30A-30D show failure mode detection results, wherein a temporarysensitivity loss is present between 19:00 pm (2901) and 8:00 am (2903),starting towards the end of the first day. The sensitivity loss eventcomprises two periods: (1) a consecutive high-ROC period, as shown inFIG. 30A (2905); and (2) a low-Isig period, shown in FIG. 30C (2907). Inaddition, a noisy period is detected towards the end of the sensor'slife, as shown in FIG. 30B (2909).

In contrast to FIGS. 30A-30D, FIGS. 31A and 31B show a permanentsensitivity loss event that, in this example, started at about 14:00 pmof the first day, towards the end of the sensor's life. This is shown at3001 on the Isig profile diagram of FIG. 31A. FIG. 31B shows thedetection results using the algorithm discussed herein. In FIG. 31B, thesensitivity loss event is detected at about 16:00 pm (3003), about 2hours after the event started, with all succeeding packets beingidentified as part of the sensitivity loss.

Calibration

As has been noted, the orthogonally redundant system includes severalfeatures which result in a reduction in calibration frequency using an“on-demand” protocol to limit calibrations to 2-4/week (down from, e.g.,2 calibrations per day). These features include: (1) Sensoraccuracy/durability improvements of electrochemical glucose sensors; (2)physiological model-based calibration algorithm; (3) redundant andorthogonal sensing technology which allows for internal self-calibrationafter individual components have reached stable-state; and (4) “Smart”diagnostics which allow for transition from timing-based to need-basedcalibration requests.

Historically, CGM systems have relied on “minimum scheduled sample time”for sensor calibration as a way to adjust for inaccuraciescharacteristic to the sensing component. Thus, existing calibrationalgorithms rely on a minimum of 1 calibration point for every 12 hoursof sensor operation (ES9199, ES9573, ES9966). Based on this standard,the DexCom SEVEN® PLUS product, e.g., requires 2 at startup and every 12hours afterward, and the FreeStyle Navigator requires calibration at 10,12, 24, and 72 hours post insertion.

As sensing technology has improved, sampling requirements havedecreased, but at the expense of system accuracy. In contrast, theinventive orthogonally redundant sensing system allows for a significantreduction in calibration frequency compared to existing sensortechnologies, while maintaining expectations of sensor accuracythroughout its lifetime.

The implementation of a diagnostic algorithm with the ability to verifysensor performance allows for a shift from “in-time” to “on-demand”calibration protocols. In this regard, FIG. 32(a) shows a simulatedcalibration scheme based on current generation single-sensor technology,and FIG. 32(b) shows an alternative made possible by measurementredundancy of the type disclosed herein. Pursuant to the lattercalibration scheme, initial calibration(s) 331 are still necessary;however, the twice-daily (time-scheduled) calibration requests are nolonger required as part of the calibration algorithm. Instead, acombination of infrequent scheduled requests 333 (i.e., once every 72hours) and on-demand requests 335 ensures that sensor calibration willonly be required when the system identifies a need to confirm sensorhealth. As system performance using this scheme relies on accurate andfrequent diagnostic information, failure detection and other advancedalgorithms will be critical to reducing the number of calibrationsrequested on a consistent basis.

It is noted that some current prototype electrochemical sensors indevelopment have internal targets of 13% MARD with signal drift lessthan 10%/day. Likewise, a calibration algorithm based on atwo-compartmental fluid-flow model of glucose transfer within the bodywill reduce the blood-to-subcutaneous concentration gradient effect(delay) as well as eliminate artifacts from the signal that are deemedto be physiologically unlikely.

In embodiments of the invention, when the orthogonally redundant glucosesensor is stable, and the Isig/pair correlation is high, a dynamiccalibration method may be used. However, when the sensor is unsteady, afixed-offset method may be used. FIG. 33 shows details of thefixed-offset calibration method. It is noted that the fixed-offsetcalibration method may be used for calibrating both the optical sensorand the echem sensor.

Some details of the dynamic regression calibration method are shown inFIG. 34, where, instead of minimizing the residual sum of squares, oneminimizes the weighted sum of squares. It is noted that, while thedynamic regression calibration method may be used for calibrating boththe optical sensor and the echem sensor, the parameters shown in FIG. 34are specifically for echem sensors.

For the optical sensor, dynamic regression is based on linear regressionwith meter glucose values (BG) and the paired optical signal ratioinside a buffer. The paired ratio is the ratio (of the optical assaysignal to the optical reference signal) that is recorded within acertain specified time of the timestamp of the BG. The BG and pairedratio points are put inside a buffer after certain conditions are met.Specifically, a dynamic regression algorithm for optical sensorcalibration in accordance with an embodiment of the invention may bedescribed with reference to the flowchart of FIGS. 35A and 35B.

The algorithm starts at block 3300, where it checks to determine whetherboth the optical sensor and the electrochemical sensor are not in theinitialization period, followed by a determination as to whether anymeter glucose value (BG)—i.e., meter glucose value of a series of one ormore values to be obtained during the process—is available forcalibration 3310. For the former determination, the optical signalratio's rate of change at start-up is checked, and the optical signal isconsidered past the initialization period when the aforementioned rateof change is below a certain threshold. In embodiments of the invention,the threshold may be determined based on in vivo and/or in vitro data.

Whenever there is new input meter BG for calibration, the algorithmperforms a validity check on the BG and its paired ratio (3320) toensure that linear regression using the BG and the paired ratio insidethe buffer would generate reliable values for calibration. Inembodiments of the invention, the validity check may be performed bydetermining whether the BG and its paired ratio fall within thespecified region of a BG and ratio validity relationship chart. In thisregard, FIG. 36 shows an illustrative graph of BG vs. Optical Ratiovalues, wherein points inside region A would be accepted, while pointsinside regions B and C would be rejected and not be put into the buffer(3325).

If there is a BG, and if it is the first BG point (3330)—of the one ormore BG points to be obtained—the algorithm will attempt to “map” theoptical sensor signal to the electrochemical sensor signal. Performingthis mapping for this beginning period enables the dynamic regressionalgorithm to start generating calibrated sensor glucose values with asingle BG point. The electrochemical sensor signals after theinitialization period and before the first calibration BG point will beused for mapping (3340). Next, a correlation value is calculated byperforming linear fitting of the optical ratio to Isig, and calculatingthe coefficient of determination between the optical signal and Isig.Based on the correlation calculation of the (optical) ratio and Isig,both of which are sensor signals before the first BG, the algorithm candetermine if the optical sensor signal and Isig match well with eachother, i.e., whether the correlation coefficient is greater than a lowerthreshold (3350). The threshold may be determined using data from invitro and/or in vivo studies.

If the optical ratio and Isig do not correlate well, then, the BG valueand the paired ratio value are saved to a first-in-first-out (FIFO)buffer of a pre-determined, or specified, size (3370). However, if thetwo signals correlate well, then a linear regression calculation isperformed on the ratio and Isig (before the first BG point) so as toobtain values for the slope and offset (3355). With the latter values,at step 3360, a mapped optical sensor signal value is obtained by usingthe relation:

(Mapped)optical ratio=(ratio+offset)*(slope)  Eqn. (8)

Next, the mapped optical sensor signal is calibrated based on the firstBG point with a fixed offset (3365), wherein:

Optical sensor glucose value=(mapped optical ratio+fixedoffset″)*(slope″)  Eqn. (9)

With a fixed offset, the slope can be obtained with a single BG andratio pair. The fixed offset may be selected based on in vivo and/or invitro data. At block 3370, the first BG and its paired ratio value aresaved to a FIFO buffer (with fixed size). In embodiments of theinvention, the buffer size may be determined by using data from in vivostudies. The algorithm then loops back to block 3310.

At node 3400, when there is a new recalibration BG point, the newrecalibration BG and its paired ratio undergo the validity checkdescribed previously in connection with FIG. 36. If the buffer size isbelow a specified limit, the new BG and its paired ratio are added tothe buffer. If, on the other hand, the buffer size exceeds the limit,then the oldest pair of BG and ratio inside the buffer are pushed out ofthe buffer and the new recalibration BG and its corresponding pairedratio are added into the buffer (3410). Next, at 3420, a determinationis made as to whether the absolute difference between the new meter BGand the previous meter BG (in the buffer) is greater than a predefinedthreshold (i.e., a “calibration BG difference” threshold). If it isdetermined that the absolute difference between the new meter BG and theprevious meter BG is greater than the calibration BG differencethreshold, then the BG and paired ratio are saved to the buffer, andlinear regression is performed based on all BG-ratio pairs inside thebuffer to obtain slope′ and offset′ (3440). A check is then performed todetermine whether the calculated slope′ and offset′ values are in anormal value range which, in embodiments of the invention, may bedetermined by in vitro and/or in vivo data (3460).

If the slope′ and offset′ values are both in the normal value range,then an optical sensor glucose value is calculated as (3470):

Optical sensor glucose value=(ratio+offset′)*slope′  Eqn. (10)

At node 3420, if it is determined that the absolute difference betweenthe new recalibration BG point and the previous recalibration BG is lessthan the pre-defined calibration BG difference threshold, then thealgorithm proceeds by finding an echem sensor glucose value to provide acalibration glucose point. In this regard, it is noted that the additionof echem sensor glucose values can provide calibration glucose pointsthat meet the calibration BG difference threshold and improve therobustness of the dynamic regression. Thus, if the absolute differencebetween the new BG and the previous BG is less than the pre-definedthreshold (calibration BG difference threshold), then the algorithmlooks for a valid echem sensor glucose value and uses that value as anadditional BG point in the buffer (3430). It is noted that, if no suchechem sensor glucose value exists, then the algorithm loops back toblock 3310.

The echem sensor value must be within a certain time limit of therecalibration BG point's timestamp, and the absolute difference betweenthat echem sensor glucose and the new recalibration meter BG must begreater than the calibration BG difference threshold. In addition, theechem sensor glucose value must be valid, such that it passes theBG-paired ratio validity check described hereinabove in connection withFIG. 36. The echem glucose values must also be in the functional regionof the echem sensor, with the MARD in that region being below a definedlimit. If such echem sensor glucose value is available, the glucosevalue and its paired ratio are saved to the buffer (3450), andcalibration is carried out as described previously, i.e., by performinglinear regression based on all BG-ratio pairs in the buffer, andcalculating slope′ and offset′ (3460). If the slope′ and offset′ areboth in the normal value range, then sensor glucose values will becalculated based on Equation 10 (3470).

In embodiments of the invention, the above-described addition of echemsensor glucose values can be performed whenever there is a newrecalibration BG point, and the absolute difference between thatrecalibration BG and the previous recalibration BG point does not exceedthe calibration BG difference threshold. In this regard, FIG. 37A showsa plot in which some of the calibration BGs do not meet the requirementthat the absolute difference between the new recalibration BG and theprevious recalibration BG be greater than a predefined calibration BGdifference threshold. As such, sensor glucose values cannot be updatedusing dynamic regression. In FIG. 37B, however, two calibration glucosevalues 3510, 3520 were obtained from echem sensor glucose values, whichenabled dynamic regression to have more points that meet the calibrationBG difference threshold for recalibrations.

Sensor Glucose (SG) Fusion

As noted previously in connection with FIG. 16, an overall calibrationmethodology in accordance with embodiments of the present inventiongenerates two sensor glucose outputs, i.e., two calibrated sensorsignals: one SG for the optical sensor, and a second SG for theelectrochemical sensor. In embodiments of the invention, a two-sensor SGfusion methodology is therefore used to generate a single SG from thetwo SGs, with the single SG having an optimum accuracy. In this regard,it is noted that a two-SG fusion methodology, or algorithm, is showngenerically at block 2030 of FIG. 16.

FIG. 38 shows the logic of a two-SG fusion algorithm in accordance witha preferred embodiment of the present invention. As depicted in thisfigure, for each SG, a sensor status check 3610, 3620 is required tokeep track of the reliability of the respective output. The keyparameters that may be used to perform a status check for theelectrochemical sensor include: (1) echem Isig value; (2) the previouscal ratio, the cal ratio being defined as BG/(Isig-offset); (3) theprevious sensor accuracy (MARD); and (4) sensitivity loss/dip flag, asdetermined by in-line sensitivity loss/dip detection (discussedhereinabove in connection with FIGS. 27-31). For the optical sensor, thekey parameters include: (1) optical ratio signal; (2) previous calratio, with cal ratio being defined as BG/optical signal; (3) previoussensor accuracy (MARD); and (4) sensitivity loss/dip flag, determined byin-line sensitivity loss/dip detection (discussed hereinabove inconnection with FIGS. 27-31).

At 3630, a reliability index (RI) is calculated for the output from eachof the electrochemical and optical sensors (3640, 3650). Specifically,in a preferred embodiment, the reliability index for each output isdefined as follows:

RI_(echem)=RI_(dip)×RI_(noise)×RI_(sensitivity loss)×RI_(cal)×RI_(accuracy)  Eqn.(11)

RI_(optical)=RI_(dip)×RI_(noise)×RI_(sensitivity loss)×RI_(cal)×RI_(accuracy)  Eqn.(12)

Wherein RI_(echem) is the reliability index for the output of theelectrochemical sensor, RI_(optical) is the reliability index for theoutput of the optical sensor, and RI_(dip) and RI_(sensitivity loss) aredetermined by the method(s) described previously in connection withFIGS. 27-31. It is noted that, when a sensor dip or sensitivity lossevent occurs, RI_(dip) or RI_(sensitivity loss) is set to 0. Otherwise,both RI_(dip) and RI_(sensitivity loss) are set equal to 1.

In the above equations, RI_(noise) is calculated by first quantifyingnoise via a noise metric as described hereinabove in connection withFIGS. 22, 23, 30, and 31. Once noise is quantified, RI_(noise) isquantified as follows: (1) If the noise metric is higher than apre-defined threshold, RI_(noise) is set equal to 0; (2) Otherwise,RI_(noise) is set equal to noise metric/threshold.

RI_(cal) is determined by cal ratios. In general, cal ratios of both theoptical sensor and the electrochemical sensor follow a log-normaldistribution. An approximation of a log-normal distribution for the calratio distribution is shown illustratively in FIG. 39. With reference toFIG. 39, it is noted that, the closer the current cal ratio is to CalRatio*, the more reliable the sensor is. Thus, RI_(cal) may be generatedby simply following the shape of the log-normal distribution, with themaximum cal ratio reliability (max RI=1 near Cal Ratio*, and the minimumcal ratio reliability (min RI_(cal))=0 when the current cal ratio is faraway from Cal Ratio*. It is important to note that, although the calratios of the optical and electrochemical sensors follow a log-normaldistribution, the value of Cal Ratio* is different for the two SGs.

Finally, RI_(accuracy) is determined by the accuracy of each sensor atthe last calibration point, with MARD being calculated as:MARD=abs(SG−BG)/BG. RI_(accuracy) is then calculated by normalizing MARDby: (1) When MARD is higher than MARD_high_thres, settingRI_(accuracy)=0; (2) When MARD is lower than MARD_low_thres, settingRI_(accuracy)=1; and (3) When MARD is between MARD_low_thres andMARD_high_thres, settingRI_(accuracy)=(MARD_high_thres−MARD)/(MARD_high_thres−MARD_low_thres),wherein MARD_high_thres is a (predetermined) upper threshold for MARD,and MARD_low_thres is a (pre-determined) lower threshold for MARD.

Once the reliability index for each of the optical and theelectrochemical sensors has been calculated, the final (i.e., fused) SGis calculated by summing the weighted SG of the electrochemical sensor(i.e., the weighted, calibrated echem signal) and the weighted SG of theoptical sensor (i.e., the weighted, calibrated optical sensor signal),as follows:

SG_fusion=sum(Weight×SG)  Eqn. (13)

where (SG) weight is determined as:

Weight=f(RI)  Eqn. (14)

In the above equation, function “f” may be either a linear function or anon-linear function, such as, e.g., an exponential function. Thus, where“f” is a linear function, Weight may be calculated as:

$\begin{matrix}{{Weight}_{i} = \frac{{RI}_{i}}{\sum\; {RI}_{i}}} & {{Eqn}.\mspace{14mu} (15)}\end{matrix}$

On the other hand, where “f” is a non-linear function,

$\begin{matrix}{{{Weight}_{i} = \frac{{RI\_ transformed}_{i}}{\sum\; {RI\_ transformed}_{i}}}{where}} & {{Eqn}.\mspace{14mu} (16)} \\{{RI\_ transformed}_{i} = {- \frac{1}{{\log \mspace{11mu} \left( {RI}_{i} \right)} + {const}}}} & {{Eqn}.\mspace{14mu} (17)}\end{matrix}$

and “const” is a constant to ensure that RI transformed is alwayspositive.

FIGS. 40A-40C illustrate an example of SG fusion. In these figures, theelectrochemical sensor loses sensitivity towards the end (FIG. 40A),while the optical sensor appears to be functioning normally (FIG. 40B).The MARD for the electrochemical sensor is 14.74%, and that for theoptical sensor is 26.07%. The overall fusion MARD, however, is 12.72%(FIG. 40C), which is a marked improvement over both the electrochemicalsensor and the optical sensor.

Duration of Wear

The orthogonally redundant sensor system increases duration of wear andreliability of data through the use of redundancy, fault detection, andadvanced algorithms to ensure at least one sensor is providing reliablemeasurements. In addition, the sensor lifetime is limited to thespecified duration of wear to ensure reliability of data.

Duration of wear can be classified in two ways: (1) the overall lifetimeof the sensor; and (2) the percent of time during wear that the sensoris displaying accurate data. The sensor lifetime is limited through lossof sensitivity and drift in-vivo that may be caused by environmentalinfluences. The orthogonally redundant sensor system decreases thefrequency of early sensor termination through the use of redundancy anddual sensing technologies, ensuring at least one sensor is providingreliable measurements for an increased duration and safeguarding againstenvironmental influences. Additionally, body worn devices must besafeguarded against sensor pull-outs that result in early termination.As such, custom adhesives for both patch and overtape may be implementedfor the combination device.

As mentioned previously (see above section on “Accuracy”), failuredetection algorithms limit the inaccurate data that is visible to thepatient but, as a result, may limit the data to such an extent that thecontinuous sensing benefits are not realized. Utilizing a redundantsensing system improves the percent of time the sensor displays databecause the frequency of anomalies simultaneously in both sensors issignificantly less than in a single sensor.

Additionally, sensors may also stay implanted beyond seven days. Sensorsimplanted beyond the labeled lifetime may be more likely to provideerroneous data. Therefore, to ensure reliability, it is important thatthe system limit sensor lifetime to the labeled time period. This isaccomplished through the system design utilizing embedded firmwaretimers in the instrumentation coupled with diagnostics methods that candetect whether a sensor has been previously used. By combining embeddedtimers and intelligent diagnostics, the system ensures that sensors arenot used beyond the period of optimal reliability and accuracy.

Form Factors

While combining two sensor systems into a single device requires moreinstrumentation and battery capacity, miniaturization and integrationmethods may be used to ensure that the transmitter device 10 is similarin size to other CGM devices.

Device size, form factor, and use model play a significant role intherapy adoption. When placing the device on the body, a larger,simply-shaped device tends to be easier to handle, whereas a smaller,organically-shaped device tends to be more preferable to wear. Inpreferred embodiments of the invention, a well-balanced design based onthe foregoing factors is adopted.

In order to avoid unsightly distortions when the device is worn underclothing, patients generally prefer a larger device footprint over addedheight. Because the device in accordance with embodiments of the instantinvention contains more complex and substantial internal components thanother CGMS products currently available, it is understood that thefootprint of the assembly is slightly larger than what is currentlyavailable. Thus, the device is as slim and sleek as possible, withminimal sacrifice in the way of volumetric efficiency.

Wafer-level design and production methods are used in a novel way tominimize the size of the optoelectronic (or optical) interrogatingsystem. A Stacked Planar Integrated Optical System (SPIOS) may becreated by fixing one multi-functional filter layer between twoinjection molded layers of optical components. The SPIOS forms a solidblock, which is self-supporting. The SPIOS is shown in the right-handside of FIG. 41, with the left-hand side showing an example of anoptical system built from discrete components.

More specifically, in an embodiment of the invention shown in FIG. 42,the inventive optical interrogating system may be designed to bemanufactured as a SPIOS (also referred to as a “Wafer Scale OpticalSystem” or a “Wafer Level Optical System”). As shown in FIG. 42, theSPIOS includes various layers that are stacked and aligned. In the waferlayer 1610, one or more light sources (e.g., LEDs and photodiodes) anddetectors may be laid out on a wafer. Alternatively, they may be nakedchips (e.g., sold by Avago Technologies or Hamamatsu), which areindividually aligned and laminated onto the SPIOS units.

One or more optical layers 1620 may include mirrors, absorbers, and/orother optical components laid out on a wafer-sized injection moldeddisk. Mold inserts defining optical surfaces are made by a diamondturning/milling company (e.g., Kaleido Technology in Denmark). Gold orprotected silver is applied to mirror surfaces, e.g., by sputtering,while any absorbers are masked off during the process.

The optical filter layer 1630 includes a wafer-sized glass substratewith optional (e.g., dielectrical) coatings. Specifically, multilayeroptical coatings may be applied on both sides of the glass substrateusing ion-assisted sputtering to form durable coatings. The technique issimilar to that used in manufacturing fluorescence filters by, e.g.,Semrock in the United States and Delta in Denmark. Thus, in one example,dielectrical coatings applied on both sides of the substrate operate tofilter excitation light, as well as the resulting fluorescence.

As shown in FIG. 42, in one embodiment, a wafer layer 1610 may befollowed by an optical layer 1620, an optical filter layer 1630, andanother optical layer 1620. The entire stack is then thoroughly alignedand laminated, e.g., by gluing, and the connections are bonded onto thechips. The stack is then diced 1640 using, e.g., a diamond saw to formmultiple assembled SPIOS units 1670, which can then be mounted andconnected to electronics.

The above-described system may be made small and is suitable forlarge-scale production. The system may be used for interrogating asensor in a light scattering environment, such as a sensor implantedinto the skin, as well as a fiber sensor. Packaging may be used to blockout ambient light. Moreover, as shown in FIG. 43, to save board space, aLED driver, two amplifier chains, and a temperature sensor specific tothe optical sensor may be integrated into a custom chip and added to theanalog front-end (AFE) for the electrochemical sensor, e.g., the AFEdesigned for use with the MiniLink® transmitter (MiniLink® availablefrom Medtronic, Inc.).

In embodiments of the invention, the LED light source 1320 shown in FIG.5 may be replaced with a red laser diode for illumination of the assaychemistry. The nature of a laser diode (smaller source diameter emissionangle compared to an LED) provides for reduction of the size of theoptical system relating to the excitation of the fiber sensor, as wellas enhanced coupling efficiency from the laser diode to the fibersensor. The latter, in turn, leads to a higher signal to noise ratio,which again leads to shorter measurement times and a smaller batterysize. Battery capacity may be reduced by as much as 75%, which alsosignificantly reduces the size of the transmitter 10.

Moreover, the higher excitation efficiency and narrower wavelength rangeof the laser diode reduce stray light problems, such that a lower lightpickup may be accepted at the detector side. As a result, the part ofthe optical system relating to fluorescence detection is reduced. All inall, the use of a laser diode may reduce the size of the optical systemto about 75% of the size of an optical system using LED excitation.Thus, e.g., a transmitter device 10 employing a laser diode as theillumination source of its optical interrogating system may have avolume of about 15 cm³ and a weight of about 10 g.

To use a red laser diode, the (assay) chemistry must be red-shifted,meaning that new fluorophores operating at higher wavelengths must beused, in order to operate in a range where the laser diode is able toexcite the chemistry. In this regard, it has been found that severalfluorophores, including AF647, QSY 21, and AF750 may be used inconjunction with a laser diode source at 645 nm. See FIG. 44.

To further miniaturize the optical system and thus reduce the size ofthe transmitter 10, it is beneficial to incorporate the laser diode intothe stacked planar integrated optical system (SPIOS) format discussedabove. It has been found that such an implementation further decreasesthe transmitter size to about 11 cm³.

Sterilization, Storage, and Shelf-Life Stability

A typical electrochemical sensor—e.g., the Enlite® sensor—may normallybe stored at room temperature and ambient atmospheric relative humiditylevels. To enable storage of the orthogonally redundant sensor (whichmay include such an electrochemical sensor) under these same conditionsand, at the same time, maintain desired usability, embodiments of theinvention include a dry version of the assay for the optical sensor. Theterm “dry chemistry” as used in this context refers to the dry form ofthe assay as compared to the original wet composition. The dry chemistrymay, for example, be in the form of a freeze dried powder or suspendedin a polymer, and not only enables dry packaging and dry storage, butalso improves shelf life stability. The assay chemistry may, e.g., bedried via a lyophilization step, which includes freezing the assay andsublimation of liquid media through rapid vacuum drying.

Moreover, as noted previously, a typical electrochemical sensor isusually sterilized through a (e-beam) radiation sterilization process.Application of the same sterilization process to an optical sensor, orto an orthogonally redundant sensor that includes an optical sensor,however, presents practical challenges, as e-beam radiation maydetrimentally affect the assay chemistry and, as such, result in loss of(optical) sensor response. In this regard, in embodiments of theinvention, a protective formulation may be included in the assay tocounteract the harmful effects of e-beam on, e.g., MBL and fluorescentdyes. The protective formulation includes protective chemical agentsthat, in addition to withstanding radiation sterilization effects, alsofacilitate sensor hydration and startup.

With regard to the above-described dry chemistry and protectiveformulation, it has also been discovered that, even without theprotective formulation, optical sensors using the dry chemistrydescribed above show little change in sensor response when exposed toe-beam radiation. In addition, the dry chemistry in fiber sensors hasbeen shown to retain its stability in the dry state for three months at5° C.

Connectivity and Data Warehousing

Connectivity and data warehousing are integrated with the orthogonallyredundant sensor system through communication with networking productsavailable, e.g., from Medtronic, Inc., including a handheld monitor(such as, e.g., MySentry™ Glucose Monitor) and CareLink® therapymanagement software.

In one embodiment, the Medtronic system provides data transfercapability between the Medtronic Patient Network (MPN) andinternet-based Medtronic CareLink® therapy management software system.This system is designed to efficiently provide data downloading,warehousing, and reports for patients and their healthcare providers(HCPs). Patients and HCPs use CareLink® reports in many ways, includingreviewing data, understanding behavior, and optimizing therapy.Additional reports provide decision support in a “professional” versionof the CareLink® system (available to HCPs) that streamlines dataanalysis in the clinical setting and highlights opportunities fortherapy modifications that can drive improved outcomes.

In a further embodiment, a Connected Care system includes an On BodyCommunicator (OBC) utilizing currently available mobile networkstechnology. The system provides the Patient, a Loved One, and aPhysician access to information from the Patient's MPN in nearreal-time. See FIG. 45.

The primary function of the OBC is to provide mobile ambulatory MPNconnectivity and data processing. The OBC communicates with theMedtronic proprietary RF protocol to establish communications with theMPN and deliver them to “the cloud” through a cellular networkcapability. Data can then be retrieved from the cloud and sent to theCareLink® Personal internet-based system. When a cellular signal isunavailable, the OBC continues to maintain operations required tocollect and process data from the MPN until the cellular signal isre-established. Once data in the cloud is available in a near real-time,the CareLink® system can deliver features designed for commerciallyavailable web enabled electronics devices such as smart phones andtablets.

As noted previously in connection with FIGS. 1 and 11, in a preferredembodiment, the OBC may be in the form of a handheld controller ormonitor with integrated blood glucose meter used for calibration. Thehandheld monitor is designed to work in conjunction with theorthogonally redundant sensor system. In addition to sending data to thecloud, the handheld monitor improves accuracy through the use ofalgorithms to provide an error check, ensuring that inaccurate bloodglucose readings are not communicated.

While the description above refers to particular embodiments of thepresent invention, it will be understood that many modifications may bemade without departing from the spirit thereof. The accompanying claimsare intended to cover such modifications as would fall within the truescope and spirit of the present invention.

The presently disclosed embodiments are therefore to be considered inall respects as illustrative and not restrictive, the scope of theinvention being indicated by the appended claims, and all changes whichcome within the meaning and range of equivalency of the claims aretherefore intended to be embraced therein.

What is claimed is:
 1. A continuous glucose monitoring systemcomprising: an orthogonally redundant glucose sensor device comprisingan optical glucose sensor and an electrochemical glucose sensor; and atransmitter operatively coupled to said electrochemical and opticalglucose sensors and having a housing, wherein the transmitter includessensor electronics in said housing, said sensor electronics including atleast one physical microprocessor that is configured to: perform astatus check on each of the electrochemical glucose sensor and theoptical glucose sensor, wherein said status check on the optical glucosesensor is based on at least one of a previous cal ratio, a previoussensor accuracy, a sensitivity loss flag, and a dip flag for the opticalglucose sensor; calculate a first reliability index for an output signalof the electrochemical sensor based on said status check for theelectrochemical sensor; calculate a second reliability index for anoutput signal of the optical sensor based on said status check for theoptical sensor; calibrate the output signal of the electrochemicalsensor to obtain an electrochemical sensor glucose value (echem SG);calibrate the output signal of the optical sensor to obtain an opticalsensor glucose value (optical SG); calculate a first weight based onsaid first reliability index and calculate a weighted echem SG based onsaid first weight; calculate a second weight based on said secondreliability index and calculate a weighted optical SG based on saidsecond weight; and calculate a single, fused sensor glucose value basedon said weighted echem SG and weighted optical SG.
 2. The system ofclaim 1, wherein said weighted echem SG is calculated by multiplyingsaid first weight by said echem SG, and wherein said weighted optical SGis calculated by multiplying said second weight by said optical SG. 3.The system of claim 1, wherein said single, fused sensor glucose valueis calculated by adding said weighted echem SG to said weighted opticalSG.
 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the transmitter wirelesslytransmits said single, fused sensor glucose value.
 5. The system ofclaim 1, wherein the transmitter is configured to be worn on a body of auser.
 6. The system of claim 1, further including a handheld monitor. 7.The system of claim 6, wherein the handheld monitor includes anintegrated blood glucose meter.
 8. The system of claim 7, wherein thetransmitter wirelessly transmits said single, fused sensor glucose valueto the hand-held monitor.
 9. The system of claim 1, further including aninsulin pump.
 10. The system of claim 9, wherein the transmitterwirelessly transmits said single, fused sensor glucose value to theinsulin pump.
 11. The system of claim 10, wherein said glucosemonitoring system is a closed-loop system.
 12. The system of claim 1,wherein the optical glucose sensor includes an assay having a glucosereceptor, a glucose analog, a first fluorophore, and a referencefluorophore different from said first fluorophore.
 13. The system ofclaim 12, wherein said output signal of the optical glucose sensor is aratio of the fluorescence signal from the first fluorophore to thefluorescence signal from the reference fluorophore.
 14. The system ofclaim 1, wherein each of the electrochemical and optical sensors has adistal portion and a proximal portion, and wherein respective distalportions of the optical sensor and the electrochemical sensor areconfigured to be co-located within a user's body.
 15. The system ofclaim 1, wherein said status check on the electrochemical glucose sensoris based on a value of said output signal of the electrochemical glucosesensor.
 16. The system of claim 1, wherein said cal ratio is defined asa meter glucose value divided by a difference between theelectrochemical glucose sensor's output signal and an offset.
 17. Thesystem of claim 1, wherein said status check on the optical glucosesensor is based on a value of said output signal of the optical glucosesensor.
 18. The system of claim 1, wherein the first reliability indexis calculated based on a reliability index for each of sensor dip,sensor noise, sensor sensitivity loss, sensor cal ratio, and sensoraccuracy for the electrochemical glucose sensor, and the secondreliability index is calculated based on a reliability index for each ofsensor dip, sensor noise, sensor sensitivity loss, sensor cal ratio, andsensor accuracy for the optical glucose sensor.
 19. The system of claim18, wherein, for both the electrochemical glucose sensor and the opticalglucose sensor, the reliability index for each of sensor dip and sensorsensitivity loss has a value of either 0 or 1.0.
 20. The system of claim18, wherein, for both the electrochemical glucose sensor and the opticalglucose sensor, the reliability index for each of sensor noise, sensorcal ratio, and sensor accuracy has a value between 0 and 1, inclusive.21. The system of claim 1, wherein said first weight is a linearfunction of said first reliability index, said second weight is a linearfunction of said second reliability index, or both.
 22. The system ofclaim 1, wherein said first weight is a non-linear function of saidfirst reliability index, said second weight is a non-linear function ofsaid second reliability index, or both.